cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1998-09-20 - Re: Questions for Magaziner?

Header Data

From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk>
To: Tom Weinstein <reinhold@world.std.com>
Message Hash: 3860c753195601203746d3d8a9a35a415ceb3c272c1639d5279202930afbb394
Message ID: <19980920154227.B29686@tightrope.demon.co.uk>
Reply To: <v03130304b227b7401a3a@[24.128.118.53]>
UTC Datetime: 1998-09-20 01:44:25 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 09:44:25 +0800

Raw message

From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 09:44:25 +0800
To: Tom Weinstein <reinhold@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Questions for Magaziner?
In-Reply-To: <v03130304b227b7401a3a@[24.128.118.53]>
Message-ID: <19980920154227.B29686@tightrope.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 02:13:39PM -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> > Arnold G. Reinhold wrote:
> >
> > One question I'd like asked is whether the US Gov will approve 56-bit RC-4
> > for export on the same terms as 56-bit DES. That would allow export
> > versions of web browsers to be upgraded painlessly, making international
> > e-commerce 64 thousand times more secure than existing 40-bit browsers.
> > (56-bit DES browsers would require every merchant to upgrade their SSL
> > servers and introduce a lot of unneeded complexity.)
> 
> Actually, it wouldn't be any easier to deploy 56-bit RC4 than DES.  Either
> would require roughly the same changes to both clients and servers.

Not easier technically but "easier" maybe politically.

Key length seems to be held (probably wrongly) as a rough measure
of crypto "strength" by journos and those in power.

40bit RC4 is weak.  How strong would 56bit RC4 be?

-- 
pgp 1024/D9C69DF9 1997/10/14 steve mynott <steve@tightrope.demon.co.uk>

Thread