[43920] in Cypherpunks
Re: ecash protocol: living in denial
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca)
Sat Nov 25 13:20:38 1995
From: s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 09:47:43 -0500 (EST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <199511250744.SAA14637@sweeney.cs.monash.edu.au>
On Sat, 25 Nov 1995, Jiri Baum wrote:
> > - Ian "Why exactly isn't DigiCash releasing the protocol? What about
> > the source?"
> ...
>
> A Source Close To Digicash That Did Not Wish To Be Quoted
> once described them as 'crown jewels' (competitive advantage).
Can you say RC4?
>
> ASCTDTDNWTBQ then appealed to Digicash's track record.
>
> I certainly hope that this genuinely is not Digicash's official opinion.
Heh.
Can you say RSADSI? (or Ron Rivest? Or NSA on Mr. Blaze's bogus LEAFs?
Need I say Elementrix non-algorithmic POTP?)
They were lucky Rivest's a decent cryptographer. (which reminds me,
what's the current list of "secure" block ciphers, besides for des and idea?
what's been analyzed or weakened lately? I'm too broke to get Schneier's
2nd ed. to check.)
> Thank you for once again showing the futility of security by obscurity.
As Ian himself is demonstrating.
