How good is MIT-PGP 2.5?
When 2.5 was first announced a few weeks ago (with the non infamous keyserver announcement), there was some concerns expressed over the political manipulations of the new program and thus, the overall security of the code. To this date I haven't seen any additional commentary on that subject, and I figure that before I recommend locally changing to 2.5, I'd like to find out what exactly was changed from the standpoint of the algoritms and the overall safety of them. No flame please, but I am not a math-oriented person, so please keep it in pseudo-english :-) ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is \/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++ n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
When 2.5 was first announced a few weeks ago (with the non infamous keyserver announcement), there was some concerns expressed over the political manipulations of the new program and thus, the overall security of the code. To this date I haven't seen any additional commentary on that subject, and I figure that before I recommend locally changing to 2.5, I'd like to find out what exactly was changed from the standpoint of the algoritms and the overall safety of them.
No flame please, but I am not a math-oriented person, so please keep it in pseudo-english :-)
I can't speak to the issue of the code itself, per se, but it should be beared in mind that it is still in Beta, right? - paul
participants (2)
-
paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com -
Robert A. Hayden