-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, blancw@pylon.com writes:
Responding to msg by Adam Shostack ( when bad things happen to good crypto):
The technical reason to oppose GAK is that it adds points of failure to a crypto system which need not be there.
[...]
And if there were no points of failure added by it, would you approve, agree, to its mandatory requirement?
Sorry, blanc, but the very existance of GAK is a point of failure. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy@cybrspc.mn.org PGP public key available by mail echo /get /pub/pubkey.asc | mail file-request@cybrspc.mn.org These are, of course, my opinions (and my machines) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLwOzQxvikii9febJAQH0XgQAnL/dMtrIgu7L1dgjswOD4LZH6yZHkZ0x V4ZFlm9oCCc089p6XaQgaOZTcBSfKiTlVHq4BXV2EWpm6ULX77rvn1cHSbmOdpvc hjFc8bbPg586if+oGRCNXs2yO5s+KQygQh72w9D3zCVDMaFaJzCZqoa9WmMT6HmM YsJJz5ytGCY= =rlpe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----