![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) To: astiglic@okiok.com, perry@piermont.com Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com In-Reply-To: <47561.207.236.193.195.1118243740.squirrel@mail.okiok.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:06:03 +1200 astiglic@okiok.com writes: >I saw allot of requirements by security auditors that looked pretty silly. "Must use 128-bit RSA encryption" has to be the all-time favourite. One I saw recently was a requirement for using X9.17 key management... in SSL. Peter. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |