NODE c4c2b2daRe: SSL trouble
Will French <wfrench@interport.net>Sat, 26 Aug 95 21:35:56 PDT
>> I don't get it. If the challenge is partly secret, how
>> will I know if I crack the code?
> You don't thats how we make sure that you can't crack the code
> and not tell everyone else.
Why would I want to do such a thing? And if I did, why would
anyone care?
> Its a matter of principle, we should ensure that the key
> breaking service is not itself subject to cryptanalytic
> attacks.
Absolutely. And the simplest way to do that is to use the
random method!
> One small point, cryptanalysis equipment is also covered by
> ITAR restrictions.
What is the significance of this rather ominous warning?
Will French <wfrench@interport.net>
NODE 063b4ae4Re: SSL trouble
Christian Wettergren <cwe@Csli.Stanford.EDU>Sun, 27 Aug 95 15:52:56 PDT
| > One small point, cryptanalysis equipment is also covered by
| > ITAR restrictions.
|
| What is the significance of this rather ominous warning?
And I guess they would consider even brute-forcing code to be
cryptoanalysis? But not the actual netscape binaries, since they
are for "proper" use. :-(
Sigh. I'm getting tired of all this.
/Christian