Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?
From: Joe Peschel (jpeschel_at_no.spam.org)
Date: 07/18/05
- Next message: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Previous message: Joe Peschel: "Re: Should be in crypto for John E. Hadstate Re: just stupid?"
- In reply to: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:06:25 -0000
Crypto@S.M.S wrote in news:11dn9mq82ci9n86@news.supernews.com:
> Once these unfounded claims have been put to rest, then maybe
> this thread will end.
Hardly anyone in sci.crypt believes the claims of weakness are unfounded.
J
-- __________________________________________ http://www.impeach-bush-now.org Joe Peschel D.O.E. SysWorks http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm __________________________________________
- Next message: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Previous message: Joe Peschel: "Re: Should be in crypto for John E. Hadstate Re: just stupid?"
- In reply to: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]