Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]
Crypto_at_S.M.S
Date: 07/19/05
- Next message: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Previous message: Bodo Moeller: "Re: general question how to choose parameters"
- In reply to: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Next in thread: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Reply: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 06:04:14 +1000
ink wrote:
> <Crypto@S.M.S> wrote
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>No, I won't shut up, because John et al are indeed totally off the mark.
>>And there are lots of people who want to deal with CryptoSMS, definitely
>>more than there are posters in this newsgroup. And I base that remark
>>on a comparison between the number of unique posters and the number of
>>registered copies of CryptoSMS.
>
> <SNIP>
>
> Then why rant on and on here defending it? If it's so good, go out and sell
> it, use your time better than wasting time here.
>
> ink
>
>
It was my customers who suggested that I answer these unfounded
allegations of weakness. It was posters from sci.crypt who started
this, by writing posting insults. I am only responding to what was
posted.
So do you really consider sci.crypt a waste of time?
- Next message: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Previous message: Bodo Moeller: "Re: general question how to choose parameters"
- In reply to: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Next in thread: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Reply: ink: "Re: Shut up? [was re: <snip>]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|