sci.crypt
By Author

3092 messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ attachment ]

---

Starting: 09/30/03
Ending: 10/31/03

• #ZHOU SUJING#
  • why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/16/03)
• Adal Chiriliuc
  • BestCrypt - Major Security Flaw Found (10/24/03)
• Adam Berent
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
• ADVIS 2004
  • CFP: ADVIS'2004 Advances in Information Systems (10/08/03)
• Ajay
  • Re: Newbie: Password based encrypting using cryptlib (10/31/03)
  • Newbie: Password based encrypting using cryptlib (10/30/03)
• Alan Connor
  • Re: One-Time_Pad (10/31/03)
  • Re: One-Time_Pad (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
• Alan Storm
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/18/03)
  • Challenge - Win one million euros (10/18/03)
• Alan Yont
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/13/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/13/03)
• Alex Biryukov
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/23/03)
• Anand CS
  • Crypto++ Compression (10/21/03)
• Anderson Rocha
  • Camalećo a software to digital steganography (10/21/03)
  • A new steganographic software for images (10/19/03)
• Andreas D. Landmark
  • Re: Basic Crypto info wanted (10/31/03)
• Andreas Koltes
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/17/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/15/03)
  • Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/14/03)
• Andrew Morgan
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/16/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/10/03)
  • SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/07/03)
  • SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/07/03)
• Andrew Swallow
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • Re: First Commercial Optical Processor (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/27/03)
  • Re: Can anybody give me some test data? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: VIA's new chip comes with hardware AES implementation and true RNG (10/16/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/09/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/09/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/09/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Crime and social change (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/07/03)
  • Crime and social change (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/02/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
• Andy Robinson
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/27/03)
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/26/03)
  • Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/26/03)
• Anne & Lynn Wheeler
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/24/03)
  • Re: Are there any authentication algorithms with runtime changeable key length? (10/23/03)
  • Re: Are there any authentication algorithms with runtime changeable key length? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/12/03)
• Anon
  • an amusing alternative to Base64 (10/22/03)
  • Re: cipher for Linux or Windows (10/21/03)
  • Re: cipher for Linux or Windows (10/21/03)
  • Re: cipher for Linux or Windows (10/21/03)
  • cipher for Linux or Windows (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
• Anonymous
  • WHY I HATE BOSCHLOO (10/24/03)
• Anonymous Sender
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
• Anton Spaans
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/27/03)
  • MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/24/03)
• Anton Stiglic
  • Re: ARC4 (10/30/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/30/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/23/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/22/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/22/03)
  • Re: How does this work? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Are there any authentication algorithms with runtime changeable key length? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/15/03)
  • code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/14/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
• Aram Whitcombe
  • WASTE (10/19/03)
• Ariel Shaqed
  • Re: how to read the math in RFCs? (10/07/03)
  • Re: IPSec Question (10/02/03)
  • Re: IPSec Question (10/01/03)
• Ash Wyllie
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/12/03)
• Bartosz Zoltak
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/23/03)
  • VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/22/03)
  • Re: Full-digraphs and trigraphs tests for VMPC cipher (10/14/03)
  • Full-digraphs and trigraphs tests for VMPC cipher (10/14/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/11/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/07/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/03/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/03/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/02/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/02/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/02/03)
  • Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/02/03)
  • Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/02/03)
  • Re: NIST randomness-tests - EXE? (10/01/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/01/03)
• Ben Pfaff
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/03/03)
• Benjamin Choi
  • Provable security against differential cryptanalysis (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/06/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/05/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
• Bill Unruh
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Qauntum Computers and brute forcing encryption (10/28/03)
  • Re: Qauntum Computers and brute forcing encryption (10/28/03)
  • Re: Naive encryption schemes (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/25/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: crypt equivalent for Win32 platform? (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Can we export 256 bits Cripto software to USA? (10/20/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/16/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/16/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
• Blurry Eyes
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/22/03)
• Bob Silverman
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
• Bodo Moeller
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/18/03)
• Brad Murray
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
• Brandon
  • Re: Dan Brown's stuff is not science but, can you help? (10/02/03)
• Brent White
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/05/03)
• Brian Gladman
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/19/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/17/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/17/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/11/03)
  • Re: Ciphertext Stealing (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
• Bruce Ding
  • 802.11b open system authentication (10/20/03)
• Bruce Murray
  • Re: Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
• Bruce Stephens
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
• Bryan Olson
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/29/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/28/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/24/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/15/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
  • Re: IPv4 vs. IPv6 [was: Re: controversial paper ] (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
• bubba
  • lfsr (10/06/03)
• Bush Beer
  • This Sux! (10/03/03)
• cafe
  • Re: Yahoo mail id (10/12/03)
• cascade
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Semiramis not broken yet (10/05/03)
• cesar bremer
  • First Commercial Optical Processor (10/29/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Can we export 256 bits Cripto software to USA? (10/20/03)
• Chad Hogan
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/20/03)
• Chiron Paixos
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/18/03)
• Chris
  • Re: BEALE questions (10/15/03)
  • BEALE questions (10/15/03)
• Chris Card
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" + "Primes in P" (10/10/03)
• Chris Jones
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
• Christian Faulhammer
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/12/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: New hash calculator (10/05/03)
  • Re: New hash calculator (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (09/30/03)
• Christophe Devine
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/13/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/10/03)
• Chuck Rittersdorf
  • Naive encryption schemes (10/27/03)
• Clay Culver
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
• Clemens Rhein
  • Public Exponent Attack (10/15/03)
• Colin Andrew Percival
  • Re: Factoring Integers "near" a power (10/31/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/29/03)
  • Re: Note on employing division for substitution purposes (10/26/03)
• Craig Feinstein
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
• Cristiano
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/11/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
• Crown&7
  • Beginner's Algorithm (10/01/03)
• crypt_at_sycom.zzn.com
  • cbc or ecb mode in idea/aes in cryptoapi-0.1.0 (10/20/03)
• CryptWolf
  • Re: cryptanalysis skype (10/22/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/12/03)
• cymelbird
  • Probability question (10/24/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
• Cypher
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/21/03)
• D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/10/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/06/03)
• Dan Johnson
  • MD5 question (10/01/03)
• Daniel Skinner
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/11/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
  • Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
• dAve
  • Re: Newbie: Password based encrypting using cryptlib (10/31/03)
• dave manley
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
• Dave Smith
  • Re: Crypto Clubs (10/02/03)
• David A. Scott
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: an amusing alternative to Base64 (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/16/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/14/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/14/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: Ciphertext Stealing (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/10/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
  • re:MegaSnakeOil (10/10/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • David Wagner where are you? (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
• David C. Partridge
  • Re: Standard for partially encrypted (or signed) messages (10/24/03)
  • Re: Standard for partially encrypted (or signed) messages (10/24/03)
  • Standard for partially encrypted (or signed) messages (10/24/03)
• David M
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
• David Magda
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/05/03)
• David Sexton
  • Re: Yahoo mail id (10/12/03)
• David Taylor
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
• David Wagner
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/27/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/26/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/26/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/26/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/22/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Good-Turing (10/22/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: B'day Attack on HMAC with Seq Nums (10/19/03)
  • Re: B'day Attack on HMAC with Seq Nums (10/19/03)
  • Re: Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/17/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/15/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/07/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: Cryptanalysis with SAT solvers (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
• davidw
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
• Death to Smoochy
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/02/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/02/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
• Delia
  • Re: 3DES wireless keybd. (10/04/03)
  • 3DES wireless keybd. (10/04/03)
• Dennis Knorr
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
• Dennis Ritchie
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
• DJohn37050
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the (10/16/03)
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: DSA Timing (10/07/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
• Dominik Reichl
  • Re: New hash calculator (10/05/03)
  • New hash calculator (10/04/03)
• Douglas A. Gwyn
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/28/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/28/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/27/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/27/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/27/03)
  • Re: Good-Turing (10/27/03)
  • Re: actual captured encrypted messages (10/27/03)
  • Re: Using 10101010 as padding. (10/27/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: BEALE questions (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/11/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/08/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Block cipher security - deterministic systems problem (10/07/03)
  • Re: how to read the math in RFCs? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/05/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/05/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
• Dr Chaos
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
• dsr_at_Florence.edu
  • Re: First Commercial Optical Processor (10/29/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
• DualPoint
  • Enhanced Presentations with PowerPoint (10/10/03)
• Eddy
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
• edo
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
  • WHY I HATE BOSCHLOO (10/24/03)
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
• Edwin Clark
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/18/03)
• Eldric Bach
  • Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/22/03)
• Eric Young
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/18/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/16/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/16/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/15/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/15/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
• Eris Pluvia
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/18/03)
• Ernst Lippe
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/19/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/17/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/17/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/16/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/16/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/16/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/11/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/10/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/10/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/09/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/09/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/07/03)
• Erwann ABALEA
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
• Eugene Styer
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
• Fernando
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
• Fight Boschloo
  • WHY I HATE BOSCHLOO (10/24/03)
• flip
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • Re: Basic Crypto info wanted (10/31/03)
  • Re: software implementation of DES (10/27/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/22/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/22/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/21/03)
  • DSA Timing (10/07/03)
• foo
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
• Foo Bar
  • Re: Provable security against differential cryptanalysis (10/31/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
• Francois Grieu
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/27/03)
  • Re: Non-forgable authorization keys for shareware registration (10/26/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/18/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/16/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/16/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/13/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/13/03)
  • Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/10/03)
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/09/03)
  • Re: Enc(hash(message) || message) authenticated encryption (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/06/03)
  • Re: Cryptanalysis with SAT solvers (10/06/03)
  • Re: Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/04/03)
  • Re: HMAC vs DSA (10/03/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/03/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/02/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/02/03)
  • Cryptanalysis with SAT solvers (10/02/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/01/03)
• futureworlds
  • I dare speak out (10/24/03)
• G. Orme
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Black Box Voting (10/25/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/14/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/11/03)
  • vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/11/03)
  • Re: question about key generators (10/08/03)
  • Re: question about key generators (10/08/03)
  • question about key generators (10/07/03)
• Gelo Ilzi
  • NIZK with deterministic prover (10/29/03)
  • Re: Qauntum Computers and brute forcing encryption (10/28/03)
  • Re: How does this work? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/03/03)
  • Re: Livin' on the edge ...VMPC challenge (10/02/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
  • unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/01/03)
• George Cox
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/15/03)
• George Ou
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/30/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/30/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/26/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/25/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
• George P
  • Re: decrypting request (10/05/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
• Gerry Myerson
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
• Gillian Seed
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
  • Execryptor (10/07/03)
• goon
  • Where to get WASTE (10/19/03)
• Greg Doyle
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
• Gregory G Rose
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: How weak is this idea? (10/28/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/28/03)
  • Re: Naive encryption schemes (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Is there any authentication algorithm with (10/22/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/21/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis skype (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
  • Re: Beginner's Algorithm (10/01/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
• Grumble
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/16/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/08/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/01/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/01/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
• Hack Bert
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
• Haitham Genedy
  • Re: IPSec Question (10/02/03)
  • Re: IPSec Question (10/01/03)
• Haldir
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: question about key generators (10/08/03)
  • Re: question about key generators (10/07/03)
• Hank
  • Re: Crime and social change (10/07/03)
  • Re: MegaSnakeOil (10/06/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/06/03)
• Hans Ludwig
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/22/03)
  • sci.crypt sandbox? (10/21/03)
• hantheman
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
• harlequin
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
• Henrick Hellström
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/16/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/14/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/11/03)
• Howard
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
• Hyper4S
  • How long to break a 512 bit RSA key? (10/31/03)
• Ian
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/18/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/18/03)
• ink
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
• InMemoriam
  • Have you seen this before??? (10/28/03)
• J. Campbell
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/29/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/28/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/28/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/27/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
• j0yst1ck
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/01/03)
• James L. Dean
  • Re: need advice (10/28/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/27/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/27/03)
• James Vanns
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/08/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
• Jan Panteltje
  • Re: First Commercial Optical Processor (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: EFF Report on Trusted Computing (10/07/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/02/03)
• Jason
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
• Jason Freidman
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
• Jeff
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/25/03)
• Jens Roeben
  • Bestcrypt: Hidden containers and NTFS - Experience? (10/18/03)
• Jens-Are Amundsen
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/13/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/13/03)
  • SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
• Jim Ford
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Quisquater and Couvreur's 1982 paper (10/10/03)
• Jim Gillogly
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/31/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/27/03)
  • Re: MD5 and SHA-1 Digest: What is the probability of repeating hash-values? (10/24/03)
  • Re: actual captured encrypted messages (10/21/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/11/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/07/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/07/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Where should I start, what should I ask? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
  • Re: MD5 question (10/01/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
• Jim Kalafut
  • One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
• Jim Steuert
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/28/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/24/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/19/03)
• Jimmy Page
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/11/03)
• Joe Peschel
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/28/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/27/03)
  • Re: xor without known key (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Can we export 256 bits Cripto software to USA? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/16/03)
  • Re: BEALE questions (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/14/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • re:MegaSnakeOil (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • MegaSnakeOil (10/05/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/04/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/03/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/03/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (09/30/03)
• Joerg Platte
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
• Jogchem
  • Enc(hash(message) || message) authenticated encryption (10/07/03)
• Johan van der Galien
  • How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/23/03)
• Johannes Wolkerstorfer
  • Re: Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/22/03)
• John A. Malley
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/29/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/10/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/10/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • Re: 3DES wireless keybd. (10/04/03)
  • Re: 3DES wireless keybd. (10/04/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/03/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
• John E. Hadstate
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
• John Eskie
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/17/03)
  • Base32 implementation? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Block cipher security - deterministic systems problem (10/07/03)
  • Block cipher security - deterministic systems problem (10/06/03)
• John Hadstate
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/22/03)
  • Re: Encrypting a file without using a password (10/20/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • HMAC vs DSA (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
• John Hairell
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/10/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/10/03)
• John M. Dlugosz
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/13/03)
  • Digital Signatures using Elliptic Curves (10/07/03)
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/03/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
• John M. Gamble
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/21/03)
• John Myre
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/03/03)
• John Savard
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/28/03)
  • Re: Naive encryption schemes (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Bias Noted in Playing Card Cipher (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/18/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/18/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/13/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/13/03)
  • The Passing of a Mathematician (10/13/03)
  • Re: Ciphertext Stealing (10/12/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/10/03)
• John Schutkeker
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/12/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/12/03)
  • DNA Computers (10/11/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/04/03)
  • Crypto Clubs (10/02/03)
  • Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
• John Veldhuis
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/14/03)
• JohnTromaville
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: How weak is this idea? (10/28/03)
  • How weak is this idea? (10/27/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/24/03)
• jos sulistyo
  • Re: Are there any authentication algorithms with runtime changeable key length? (10/23/03)
  • Are there any authentication algorithms with runtime changeable key length? (10/22/03)
  • Is there any authentication algorithm with (10/22/03)
• Jose Castejon-Amenedo
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/16/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/15/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/15/03)
• joss
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
• jsavard_at_ecn.ab.ca
  • Re: EFF Report on Trusted Computing (10/07/03)
• Jubilation T. Cornpone, CSA
  • Re: Another Thawte Challenge... (10/29/03)
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/20/03)
• Justin Ding
  • How does this work? (10/21/03)
• Jyrki Lahtonen
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/24/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/22/03)
• katiki_at_kodak.com
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • Re: Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
  • Issue using encryption in Debug/Release mode ?? (10/01/03)
• Kenjis Kaan
  • Re: crypt equivalent for Win32 platform? (10/22/03)
  • crypt equivalent for Win32 platform? (10/21/03)
• Kent Briggs
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
• Kev
  • Re: Naive encryption schemes (10/28/03)
• Kevin
  • Basic Crypto info wanted (10/31/03)
• Klaus Pommerening
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/09/03)
  • Re: Security Criteria of Block Ciphers (10/01/03)
• Konstantin Larionov
  • ARC4 (10/30/03)
• Kristian Gjųsteen
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
• Kristian Olsen
  • TSD = Uncle fucker! (10/24/03)
  • Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/04/03)
  • Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/03/03)
• kurt wismer
  • Re: Basic Crypto info wanted (10/31/03)
  • Re: xor without known key (10/28/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
• lapin des pyrenees
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/07/03)
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/07/03)
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/07/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/06/03)
  • a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/06/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
• Lassi Hippeläinen
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Can we export 256 bits Cripto software to USA? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/20/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Re: Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: IPv4 vs. IPv6 [was: Re: controversial paper ] (10/01/03)
• lcs Mixmaster Remailer
  • I dare speak out (10/24/03)
• Le Chaud Lapin
  • Re: First Commercial Optical Processor (10/30/03)
• Len Norton
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
• lolo
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
• Lord Shaolin
  • Re: new Web site at cryptograph.org (10/16/03)
• Lorenzo Bolognini
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
• Louis Granboulan
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/29/03)
• m_houllier
  • Re: Yahoo mail id (10/11/03)
  • Re: Storage based 3Des Password (Checksum) (10/09/03)
  • Storage based 3Des Password (Checksum) (10/08/03)
• macckone_at_a_nospamjunk123_ol.com
  • Re: question about key generators (10/08/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/05/03)
• MacGregor K. Phillips
  • Re: One-Time_Pad (10/31/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/03/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
• Mack
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/16/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/13/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/09/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/09/03)
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
• Mads Rasmussen
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
• Mailman
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/03/03)
• Mantorok Redgormor
  • xor without known key (10/26/03)
• Marc Olschok
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/13/03)
• Marcel Martin
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/23/03)
  • Re: Matrix Question (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • NX (10/18/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/12/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/04/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/03/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/02/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/01/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/01/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/01/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/01/03)
• Marco
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
• Marco Era
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/31/03)
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/31/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
• Mark Shelor
  • Re: B'day Attack on HMAC with Seq Nums (10/19/03)
  • B'day Attack on HMAC with Seq Nums (10/19/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/15/03)
• Mark Snelling
  • Numeric one-way hash function (10/07/03)
• Markus Jansson
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/23/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/19/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/18/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/18/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/05/03)
  • What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/04/03)
• Matt Taylor
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/16/03)
• Matthew Skala
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: MD5 question (10/12/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: how to read the math in RFCs? (10/06/03)
• Matthijs van Duin
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Simple authenticated channel (10/15/03)
  • Re: Simple authenticated channel (10/15/03)
  • Simple authenticated channel (10/14/03)
• Matthue Gera
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
• mhamrick
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/13/03)
• Micah Cowan
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/12/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/11/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/11/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/11/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: how to read the math in RFCs? (10/06/03)
• Michael
  • Re: new Web site at cryptograph.org (10/16/03)
  • new Web site at cryptograph.org (10/16/03)
• Michael Amling
  • Re: counter mode and data integrity (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: One-Time_Pad (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/28/03)
  • Re: Have you seen this before??? (10/28/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/27/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: Standard for partially encrypted (or signed) messages (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/22/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/21/03)
  • Re: Prime number generating function (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/18/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/16/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/14/03)
  • Re: Full-digraphs and trigraphs tests for VMPC cipher (10/14/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Cycles in a random bijective mapping (10/11/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Storage based 3Des Password (Checksum) (10/09/03)
  • Re: Storage based 3Des Password (Checksum) (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/07/03)
  • Re: Enc(hash(message) || message) authenticated encryption (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Beginner's Algorithm (10/01/03)
  • Re: Beginner's Algorithm (10/01/03)
  • Re: RSA security (10/01/03)
• Michael Brown
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/24/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
  • Re: 3DES wireless keybd. (10/04/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/02/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/02/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/02/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
• Michael J. Fromberger
  • Re: A new steganographic software for images (10/23/03)
• Michael Scott
  • substitution cipher CBC (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/15/03)
• Mike
  • Re: BEST OF: Richard Heathfield OFFICIAL TROLL FEEDER '2002 (10/24/03)
• Mike Curry
  • Another Thawte Challenge... (10/29/03)
  • Re: How weak is this idea? (10/28/03)
  • Cracking SSL (10/10/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/06/03)
• Mike Scott
  • Re: The system used by AC and friends (10/05/03)
• Mok-Kong Shen
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/30/03)
  • (URL) A new PRNG of Marsaglia (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: First Commercial Optical Processor (10/29/03)
  • Re: substitution cipher CBC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: Note on employing division for substitution purposes (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: Generators of cyclic group (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: Have you seen this before??? (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Note on employing division for substitution purposes (10/26/03)
  • Re: Note on employing division for substitution purposes (10/26/03)
  • Note on employing division for substitution purposes (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/26/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/23/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/21/03)
  • Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: A new steganographic software for images (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/19/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/19/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/17/03)
  • Q: Correlations (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/16/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: new Web site at cryptograph.org (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/15/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/14/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/11/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" + "Primes in P" (10/10/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Release 1.4 of my AES implementation (10/10/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/09/03)
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/07/03)
  • Re: Crime and social change (10/07/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/06/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? - Off Topic (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/06/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Bootstrapping (10/06/03)
  • Bootstrapping (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are numbers stations using OTPs? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/03/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
  • Re: NIST randomness-tests - EXE? (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/01/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
• Mxsmanic
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/31/03)
  • Re: How long to break a 512 bit RSA key? (10/31/03)
  • Re: Basic Crypto info wanted (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/31/03)
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: xor without known key (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Standard for partially encrypted (or signed) messages (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/24/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/24/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/22/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: Using 10101010 as padding. (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Using 10101010 as padding. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Can we export 256 bits Cripto software to USA? (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/19/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Security of Win2k or WinXP built in EFS - continued from Meganet challenge (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Yahoo mail id (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/11/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/09/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Storage based 3Des Password (Checksum) (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Execryptor (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
  • Re: What (if any) mechanical crypto is safe today? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/05/03)
  • Are numbers stations using OTPs? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Any recommended software for 3DES encryption? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/03/03)
  • Re: MD5 question (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Other good Crypto programs...? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
• n1pop_at_hotmail.com
  • Re: Encrypting a file without using a password (10/20/03)
• Neko
  • One-Time_Pad (10/30/03)
  • manual cryptography (10/28/03)
  • need advice (10/27/03)
• nemo outis
  • Re: Have you seen this before??? (10/29/03)
• newstome_at_comcast.net
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
• Nicol So
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/15/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
• Nils Goesche
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
• No One
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
• Nomen Nescio
  • Kalai's algorithm for fast, factored random numbers (10/13/03)
  • EFF Report on Trusted Computing (10/07/03)
• None
  • Bonehead basic crypto question (10/17/03)
• Novice
  • Choosing e in RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Choosing e in RSA (10/25/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • encrypting a message with a symmetric key (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
• Nudge
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/26/03)
  • Re: Matrix Question (10/23/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/16/03)
  • VIA's new chip comes with hardware AES implementation and true RNG (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
• Ohaya
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
• Panic
  • Re: Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/22/03)
  • Re: Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/22/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/21/03)
  • Re: Prime number generating function (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Generation/security of initialisation vectors (10/14/03)
  • Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/13/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/13/03)
  • Re: Ciphertext Stealing (10/12/03)
  • Ciphertext Stealing (10/11/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/10/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
  • AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
• Pathos
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
• Paul Crowley
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
• Paul J Gans
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/02/03)
• Paul Rubin
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/22/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/21/03)
  • Re: Want to learn cryptology with me? (10/21/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: OpenSSL C coding guide (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/17/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/17/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/15/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: Simple authenticated channel (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Simple authenticated channel (10/14/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/10/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/09/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: SSL Addition to LibTomCrypt (10/08/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/08/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
  • Re: MD5 question (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: decrypting request (10/01/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/01/03)
• Paul Schlyter
  • Re: OpenSSL C coding guide (10/19/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Base32 implementation? (10/18/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/16/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/15/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/07/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/05/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
• Paul Sheer
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
• pbs
  • The system used by AC and friends (10/05/03)
  • Re: to sig or not to sig? (10/03/03)
• Peter Fairbrother
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Universal re-encryption (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/17/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/15/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • "incrementing" ecb mode (10/14/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/01/03)
• Phil Carmody
  • Re: How long to break a 512 bit RSA key? (10/31/03)
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: Factoring Integers "near" a power (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/27/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: TSD = Uncle fucker! (10/24/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/24/03)
  • Re: Can anybody give me some test data? (10/24/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/23/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/22/03)
  • Re: Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/17/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/16/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/14/03)
  • Re: code for generating irreducible polynomials (10/14/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/12/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/12/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/12/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/07/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/07/03)
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/06/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
• Phil Frisbie, Jr.
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/22/03)
• Pilou
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/05/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/05/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
• pleyland_at_microsoft.com
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
• PolicySpy
  • Re: My Resume (10/22/03)
• puzzolino
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/31/03)
  • What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/30/03)
• r.e.s.
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/28/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/22/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • Re: hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
  • hash/SHA-1 questions (10/16/03)
• R.Lillelien
  • how to read the math in RFCs? (10/05/03)
• Ramon F Herrera
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/04/03)
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/04/03)
  • A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/04/03)
• Randy Howard
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/04/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/02/03)
• Reddy
  • Yahoo mail id (10/11/03)
• Richard Heathfield
  • Re: Have you seen this before??? (10/28/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/28/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/28/03)
  • Re: xor without known key (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/19/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: ARE AMERICANS FREE TO BREAK CRYTPO (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/04/03)
  • Re: Rotor Machine Questions (10/02/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
• Richard Herring
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/29/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/28/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
• Rickey Braddam
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/18/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/15/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/12/03)
• Ritchie
  • Re: Encrypting a file without using a password (10/20/03)
  • Encrypting a file without using a password (10/20/03)
• Rob D.
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/12/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
• Rob Marston
  • Re: A solution looking for a problem (Vigenere Factors) (10/07/03)
• Rob Warnock
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Re: IPv4 vs. IPv6 [was: Re: controversial paper ] (10/02/03)
  • IPv4 vs. IPv6 [was: Re: controversial paper ] (10/01/03)
• Robert Harley
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • NSA chooses ECC (10/26/03)
• robertocarlos
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/29/03)
  • cryptanalysis cost (10/27/03)
• Robin Chapman
  • Re: Formulae for Latin squares of size 2^n (10/21/03)
• Robin Lavall?e
  • Generators of cyclic group (10/28/03)
• Roger Schlafly
  • Crypto Mini-FAQ (10/30/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Crypto Mini-FAQ (10/22/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN - OT (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/20/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/16/03)
  • Crypto Mini-FAQ (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: vote fraud (10/11/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/11/03)
  • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet (10/11/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/10/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/08/03)
  • Crypto Mini-FAQ (10/08/03)
  • Re: EFF Report on Trusted Computing (10/07/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/06/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: MD5 question (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/03/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/02/03)
  • Re: Does quantum cryptography actually work? (10/01/03)
• ross
  • Re: deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/09/03)
  • deficiences of linear congruential RNGs (10/08/03)
• RPK
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
• Russell W. Patterson
  • actual captured encrypted messages (10/21/03)
• S.Ligthert
  • cryptanalysis skype (10/21/03)
  • Re: OpenSSL C coding guide (10/20/03)
  • Re: OpenSSL C coding guide (10/20/03)
  • OpenSSL C coding guide (10/19/03)
• Sander Vesik
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/04/03)
• Sasha
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/12/03)
  • Re: Software Installation Keys (10/02/03)
• Scott Contini
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/24/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/23/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/23/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/23/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/22/03)
  • Re: Rijndael S-Box representation in GF(2^4) (10/22/03)
  • Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/21/03)
  • Re: cipher for Linux or Windows (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: WHY TO GO BERNSTEIN (10/19/03)
  • Re: Public Exponent Attack (10/16/03)
  • Re: Kalai's algorithm for fast, factored random numbers (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/07/03)
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/07/03)
• Scott Fluhrer
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/12/03)
  • Re: how to read the math in RFCs? (10/06/03)
• ScottD
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
• Sean
  • Qauntum Computers and brute forcing encryption (10/27/03)
• Shannon Appel
  • [SSL-Talk List FAQ] Secure Sockets Layer Discussion List FAQ v1.1.1 (10/10/03)
• Shawn
  • Re: Matrix Question (10/24/03)
  • Matrix Question (10/23/03)
• Shill
  • Re: SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/18/03)
  • SHA-256 performance on x86 (10/15/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Benchmarks (10/10/03)
• Simon Johnson
  • Re: manual cryptography (10/29/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/28/03)
  • Re: TSD = Uncle fucker! (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/24/03)
  • Re: How does this work? (10/21/03)
  • Re: crypt equivalent for Win32 platform? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Universal re-encryption (10/21/03)
  • Re: Using 10101010 as padding. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Is it possible to devise a public-key cipher with no flaws? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Numeric one-way hash function (10/17/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/13/03)
  • Why VME is bad (10/11/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/11/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/05/03)
  • Re: SP-network definition (10/05/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Is MD5 outdated ? (10/01/03)
  • Re: e-voting (10/01/03)
• Sisyphus
  • Re: crypt equivalent for Win32 platform? (10/23/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
  • Re: Factoring with cubic equations? (10/04/03)
• SKH
  • Identity AES transformation (10/10/03)
• Skybuck Flying
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/21/03)
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/21/03)
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/21/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/20/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: Using 10101010 as padding. (10/20/03)
  • Using 10101010 as padding. (10/20/03)
  • ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: best encryption + mode for network packets ? (10/20/03)
  • Re: end conclusion for network packet encrypting/decrypting with AES: (10/19/03)
  • Re: end conclusion for network packet encrypting/decrypting with AES: (10/19/03)
  • end conclusion for network packet encrypting/decrypting with AES: (10/19/03)
  • end conclusion for network packet encrypting/decrypting with AES: (10/19/03)
  • Re: follow up: some modes explained, security, ECB needs padding ? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Is encrypting/decrypting network packets like this safe ? (10/19/03)
  • Re: follow up: some modes explained, security, ECB needs padding ? (10/19/03)
  • follow up: easier one to read (10/19/03)
  • follow up: some modes explained, security, ECB needs padding ? (10/19/03)
  • best encryption + mode for network packets ? (10/19/03)
  • Is encrypting/decrypting network packets like this safe ? (10/17/03)
• someone
  • Re: Can anybody give me some test data? (10/25/03)
  • Can anybody give me some test data? (10/24/03)
  • Can anybody give me some test data? (10/24/03)
• Stang
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
• Stefan Seiffarth
  • Re: How long to break a 512 bit RSA key? (10/31/03)
  • Re: THAT'S IT !! (10/01/03)
• stefek.zaba_at_hp.com
  • Re: Is this right? Question about SSL and PKI... (10/26/03)
  • Re: 802.11b open system authentication (10/21/03)
  • Re: best encryption + mode for network packets ? (10/19/03)
  • Re: Encryption for IPv6 (10/17/03)
  • Re: Cracking SSL (10/13/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Identity AES transformation (10/13/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/11/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
• Stephen Cantini
  • I apologize for my previous post... (10/31/03)
  • Vigenere++ Proposal of a (new?) cipher (10/29/03)
• Stush
  • Factoring Integers "near" a power (10/27/03)
• Tanu R.
  • Re: Johnny Mnemonic (10/31/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/29/03)
  • Re: need advice (10/28/03)
  • Re: The Passing of a Mathematician (10/16/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/13/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
• TC
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: Yahoo mail id (10/12/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/10/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
• tcne
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/14/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/13/03)
  • Re: DNA Computers (10/13/03)
  • Re: unprovability of the security of computational cryptography (10/13/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
  • Re: Paper - impossible to prove P=?NP (10/01/03)
• Terry
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
  • Re: This is soooo kool! (10/01/03)
• thisisme
  • Unintentional Decaffeination (was Re: Universal re-encryption) (10/21/03)
• Thomas Anderson
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
• Thomas Pornin
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
• Thomas Wu
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/14/03)
• tiny lizard
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/22/03)
• Tom St Denis
  • Re: What ? I can't use cryptography in my app... (10/31/03)
  • Re: Provable security against differential cryptanalysis (10/30/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: cryptanalysis cost (10/28/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/28/03)
  • Re: Qauntum Computers and brute forcing encryption (10/27/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: Factoring Integers "near" a power (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/26/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: VMPC stream cipher - no short cycles possible (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/25/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/25/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/25/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/25/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/24/03)
  • Re: Probability question (10/24/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/24/03)
  • Re: generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Can anybody give me some test data? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • Re: Is it OK with newbie questions in this NG? (10/24/03)
  • generators be bound (10/24/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/24/03)
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: looking at Diffie Hellman (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Looking for Streaming Cipher alternative to Blowfish (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/23/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/22/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/22/03)
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/22/03)
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/22/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/22/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: Improved Cryptanalysis of SecurID (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/21/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/21/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: Encrypting a file without using a password (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: just an idea for packet protocol using ECB (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/20/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/20/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Bonehead basic crypto question (10/18/03)
  • Those hash test vectors (10/18/03)
  • Re: New software featuring GEM 1024 bit encryption engine. (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/17/03)
  • Re: why does PSS signature scheme put a "0" before the input to the RSA function? (10/16/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/15/03)
  • Re: T.S.D. Why do you use the word "uber" so much? (10/14/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: SSL v2.0 (10/10/03)
  • Re: AES optimizations for different implemenations (10/10/03)
  • Re: followup to SSL+LTC (10/10/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/10/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • followup to SSL+LTC (10/09/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/09/03)
  • SSL Addition to LibTomCrypt (10/08/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/08/03)
  • Re: SHA-1 Test Vectors (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/08/03)
  • Re: Semiramis not broken yet (10/07/03)
  • Re: VMPC Stream Cipher - ideas on potential weaknesses? (10/07/03)
  • Re: DSA Timing (10/07/03)
  • Re: [Newbie] Prime factorization question (10/07/03)
  • Re: Bootstrapping (10/05/03)
  • Re: SP-network definition (10/05/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/05/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/04/03)
  • Re: controversial paper (10/04/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
  • Re: A revised "FFT" hash function. (10/03/03)
  • Re: Nonlinearity in block cipher round functions (10/03/03)
  • Re: A revised "FFT" hash function. (10/02/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
• Tony T. Warnock
  • Re: Long Vigenere Keys (10/01/03)
• Ulf Reiman
  • Verfication of security protocol (10/29/03)
• Ulrich Wurst
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/27/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: ECB security (10/20/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/16/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/15/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/15/03)
  • Re: Newby simple question... (10/14/03)
  • Impact of IDEA's weak keys (10/14/03)
  • Re: CPU usage (10/10/03)
  • Re: Enc(hash(message) || message) authenticated encryption (10/07/03)
  • Re: Turing's Mathematics (10/01/03)
  • Re: ...before Radix-64 layer and Compression Algorithms? (10/01/03)
• user_at_domain.invalid
  • Re: One-sided authentication for small micros? (10/16/03)
• Vedat Hallac
  • Re: a question about the Qaudratic Sieve (10/06/03)
• Vempu
  • Re: sci.crypt sandbox? (10/21/03)
  • Re: Challenge - Win one million euros (10/19/03)
• Venatyr
  • Re: Execryptor (10/07/03)
• Vernon Schryver
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/14/03)
  • Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers? (10/06/03)
• Victor S. Miller
  • Re: NSA chooses ECC (10/29/03)
• Vincent Granville
  • Prime number generating function (10/21/03)
• Vioxel
  • non-prime-number based code (10/10/03)
• W. Othman
  • Re: How To Handle Huge Numbers In 2048 Bit RSA (10/24/03)
• wefgw_at_bang.com
  • Chosen Cyphertext Attack Security (10/20/03)
• Will Dickson
  • Re: Beginner's Algorithm (10/01/03)
• William Ahern
  • Re: OpenSSL C coding guide (10/23/03)
• wrong way philbin
  • Re: encrypting a message with a symmetric key (10/25/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/21/03)
  • Re: How much does 'large' mean? (10/20/03)
  • Re: Schneier's "Helix" cipher is remarkably similar to the "generic feistel cipher" (10/20/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert" (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/15/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: Which algorithm would YOU choose for... (10/14/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/13/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/10/03)
  • Re: David Wagner where are you? (10/10/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
  • Re: Encrypted software backups? (10/09/03)
• xam
  • software implementation of DES (10/27/03)
• Zack Best
  • Re: vote fraud (10/14/03)
• Zulfikar Ramzan
  • Re: FIPS140 Certification (10/11/03)

Last message date: 10/31/03
Archived on: 10/31/03 CET

---

3092 messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ attachment ]