Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)
From: Jan Wildeboer (jan.wildeboer@gmx.de)
Date: 08/29/02
- Next message: Perry E. Metzger: "Long RSA keys"
- Previous message: Peter C. Lai: "Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Maybe in reply to: =?iso-8859-1?B?U3RlZmFuIEty/Gdlcg== ?=: "1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Next in thread: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:58:43 +0200 From: Jan Wildeboer <jan.wildeboer@gmx.de> To: Michael W Mitton <mmitton@hmcon.com>
Michael W Mitton wrote:
> Beside, I'm sure the federal government ( any federal government )
> wouldn't blink an eye at 1 billion dollars if they could read everyones
> email. ;)
They would pay Bill a fraction of that and we can be sure that all
windows machines will send unencryted copies of each and every mail to a
federal server.
And then they will make a law that will make sure you will be arrested
when you send mail with a non-M$ mail client ;-)
Gosh, is this OT :-) Sorry to feed it ...
Jan Wildeboer
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
- Next message: Perry E. Metzger: "Long RSA keys"
- Previous message: Peter C. Lai: "Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Maybe in reply to: =?iso-8859-1?B?U3RlZmFuIEty/Gdlcg== ?=: "1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Next in thread: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]