[47693] in Cypherpunks
Re: The Lotus Position
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kevin L Prigge)
Mon Jan 22 16:19:17 1996
From: Kevin L Prigge <Kevin.L.Prigge-2@cis.umn.edu>
To: herbs@connobj.com (Herb Sutter)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 15:03:54 -0600 (CST)
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960122012052.006d87c0@mail.interlog.com> from "Herb Sutter" at Jan 21, 96 08:20:52 pm
Herb Sutter said:
> In answer to a question from the floor, Ozzie did say that yes, the
> agreement reached with the NSA was scalable -- IOW, that you could use
> 128-bit keys and give the government 88 of them, instead of 64-and-give-24
> -- but in retrospect I wonder whether keeping Notes at 64 bits was a
> condition of the NSA deal. I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist, but
> considering that Ray was clearly aware that the 64-bitness was going to
> raise eyebrows and still somehow didn't get around to simply strengthening
> it... well, it makes you wonder.
Not really. I think the governments position has been 64 bits with
escrow. I doubt that they'd actually ship a 128 bit version with
88 bits escrowed, as I believe the government has stated in the
past that they don't want to give away the store even with escrow.
--
Kevin L. Prigge |"Have you ever gotten tired of hearing those
UofM Central Computing | ridiculous AT&T commercials claiming credit
email: klp@tc.umn.edu | for things that don't even exist yet?
010010011101011001100010| You will." -Emmanuel Goldstein
