[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sarah's Bio
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
> [email protected] (Jason Plank) said:
> > Phil Zimmerman solved this problem by supplying the source code for
> >his product. You can see for yourself that there are no backdoors.
>
> This helps, but is imperfect. How many people will read their particular
> copy in sufficient detail to ascertain that there aren't any obvious
> backdoors added by e.g. a sneaky archive site maintainer, or some sneaky
> cracker who found a way to modify the archived copy?
Well, I did for one. Some of you may remember me posting to sci.crypt
quite some time ago, because the one thing I wasn't happy about was the
use of a probabilistic primality tester when there were completely
certain primality tests available (albeit a bit more expensive in cpu).
(especially since I didn't understand how the probabilistic one worked)
I see from a posting on sci.crypt today that the probabilistic tests
have been show to be possibly mildly weak in some infrequent cases.
Probably not worth worrying about, but still, it's a sobering thought.
The rest of the code I understood well enough to trust it, mostly :)
G
--
Personal mail to [email protected] (I read it in the evenings)
Business mail to [email protected] (Be careful with the spelling!)
Faxes to An Teallach Limited: +44 31 662 4678 Voice: +44 31 668 1550 x212