Re: PGP Secure? Nope!
From: Bill Unruh (unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca)
Date: 02/27/03
- Next message: Bill Unruh: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Previous message: Player: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- In reply to: Hans Fleischmann: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Next in thread: Tom McCune: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Reply:(deleted message) Tom McCune: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Reply: Sam Simpson: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) Date: 27 Feb 2003 01:25:57 GMT
Hans Fleischmann <hansi@stack.n_l> writes:
]I think PGP-security is OK for me at the moment. Although I believe that
]the NSA has huge computing power and does have the best cryptologists in
]the world, I still do not think they can crack a regular PGP-signed
]message within a reasonable time, say a year, assuming that they are not
]given any backdoor (i.e. weak passphrase). Moreover I do not think the
]information I send around is interesting enough or even seems
]interesting enough for them to try to crack it.
]I believe the NSA can not systematically crack all PGP-encrypted
]messages they recieve, not even from a single email-adres and at the
]moment I believe the NSA can't crack reasonably executed PGP-encryption
]at all.
]Hans Fleischmann
]FYI: PGP dropped the 3DES-algorithm a long time ago and is now using
]Diffie-Hellman for synchronous encryption.
??? PGP never used 3DES (It may be an option now.) It started with a
home grown insecure algorithm developed by Zimmerman, then went to Idea
(which is patented) and now gives you a choice between a number. This is
for the symmetric algorithm. For the public key it has always used RSA.
Recently it has also given the option of DH.
]> | Anyone really believe that PGP offer encryption without backdoors for US
]> | government???
Well, read the source code. If you can find the backdoor, you will be
famous.
]> | Anyone really believe that the CIA e-mail scanners ( Eshelon ) really
]> comes
]> | to short when trying to access a PGP encrypted mail or file?
See above
]> |
]> | Here is an alternative:
]> | http://technology.glueckkanja.com
]> |
]> http://www.focus-europe.com/Tech_White_Paper_Migrating_from_NAI_PGP_to_Crypt
]> | oEx.pdf
Wow. Go from using an algorithm which is well tested to some homegrown
system. Why not use your own special decoder ring instead.
]> |
]> | An additional tool for encrypting disks:
]> | www.bestrcrypt.com
]> |
]> | An additional tool for encrypting SFX packages:
]> | http://www.klsofttools.com/pkey.php
]> |
]> | Non of these is tools are "made in USA" - a good proof for security!
And why would that be? No other government in the world is interested in
reasing encrypted communications?
- Next message: Bill Unruh: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Previous message: Player: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- In reply to: Hans Fleischmann: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Next in thread: Tom McCune: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Reply:(deleted message) Tom McCune: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Reply: Sam Simpson: "Re: PGP Secure? Nope!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
