Re: Anonymous Nymserver: anon.nymserver.com
Bill Stewart wrote:
However, if you want to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt,
at least keep your facts straight; it does a much better job.
The straight facts are that you can't trust your best friend not to bop your old-lady, given ample opportunity, and to put even more trust in a stranger is foolish.
PGP 2.0-->2.3a were released outside of the U.S. and imported into
the country.
The use of PGP=>2.5 suddenly became a 'non-issue' for use in the U.S.
because they use both the algorithm and sub-routines developed by the
NSA and the Military.
The new algorithm was the International Drug Entrapment Agency algorithm,
introduced in PGP 2.0 to replace the previous non-NSA-crackable algorithm,
Bass-O-Matic. Pay no attention to the comments in the source about fnords,
/* these aren't the subroutines you're looking fnord */ and follow the money.
PGP 2.5 became a non-issue because RSAREF takes care of the patent problem -
which is largely because the widespread use of PGP really did spread the
RSA algorithm's popularity, and giving away free licenses was about the only
way for RSA Inc. to regain any control over it at all.
Are you saying that the patent on the RSA algorithm wasn't enforceable?
If you want to do
a better job of FUD, you could talk about the under-the-table relationship
between MIT and RSA or the RSA and NSA (they're only different by one letter!)
or notice that the CAPSTONE implementations of Clipper used algorithms
patented by PKP...
The relationship between MIT and the NSA and the Military isn't very far under the table. The spooks funded MIT's RSA development, and they are not noted for funding projects for the good of the common man. To suggest that they would fund a form of cryptography that didn't have their own back-door for sounds implausible. TruthMonger
In <199703120846.BAA02942@shaman.lycaeum.org>, on 03/12/97 at 02:46 AM, TruthMonger <an7575@anon.nymserver.com> said:
The relationship between MIT and the NSA and the Military isn't very far under the table. The spooks funded MIT's RSA development, and they are not noted for funding projects for the good of the common man. To suggest that they would fund a form of cryptography that didn't have their own back-door for sounds implausible.
Well the source code is available for PGP & the RSA library. Can you document where in the code there is a back door for the government? If you can show what part of the code gives you concerns I am sure everyone on the list would be eager to listen otherwise this is just more FUD. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii@amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Windows with bullet-proof glass.
William H. Geiger III wrote:
In <199703120846.BAA02942@shaman.lycaeum.org>, on 03/12/97 at 02:46 AM,
TruthMonger <an7575@anon.nymserver.com> said:
The relationship between MIT and the NSA and the Military
isn't very far under the table.
The spooks funded MIT's RSA development, and they are not
noted for funding projects for the good of the common man.
To suggest that they would fund a form of cryptography that
didn't have their own back-door for sounds implausible.
Well the source code is available for PGP & the RSA library. Can you
document where in the code there is a back door for the government?
Can you document where it isn't?
If you can show what part of the code gives you concerns I am sure everyone
on the list would be eager to listen otherwise this is just more FUD.
I realize that you may be too inexperienced in just how the real world works to understand the value of mistrusting systems whose development is bought and paid for by the spooks, but I wish I had a nickle for every loser in history who went to the gallows complaining that they'd been lied to and fucked over when the real problem was that they had their hands over their ears and thier eyes closed. Zimmerman may be a saint or a ratfucker, but either way, he doesn't have a key to the cell door, so I'd rather count on myself to stay on the open-air side of it. I would suggest that if you want to look for "FUD" you take a look at your own trusting faith in spook-produced cryptography. TruthMonger
participants (2)
-
TruthMonger -
William H. Geiger III