[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RIPEM 1.2

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RIPEM 1.2
From: [email protected] (Linn Stanton)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 16:45:22 +0500
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> (message from Christopher Allen on Wed, 16 Mar 1994 13:06:27 -0800)
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "Christopher" == Christopher Allen <[email protected]> writes:

    Christopher> Now that there is a new version of RIPEM available,
    Christopher> what do you think of it? What do you think is the
    Christopher> value in using it over PGP?

I am glad to see that the 'web of trust' model is spreading. However,
I still see no reason to use ripem.

1) ripem is illegal for non-north-american users
2) ripem still uses DES
3) using ripem supports the notion that PKP holds some valid patents


Linn H. Stanton <[email protected]>

The above opinions are exclusively my own. If anyone else wants them,
they can buy them from me. Easy terms can be arranged.
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.2
 
mQBNAitK8+EAAAECALzK83DH79m7DLKBmZA2h9U33fBE80EwT4xRY05K7WRfxpO3
BmhPVBmes9h97odVZ0RxAFvinOl4wZGOb8pDclMABRG0IUxpbm4gSC4gU3RhbnRv
biA8c3RhbnRvbkBhY20ub3JnPrQnTGlubiBILiBTdGFudG9uIDxsc3RhbnRvbkBz
aGVhcnNvbi5jb20+
=oCru
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQBVAgUBLYd958GRjm/KQ3JTAQGZHgH/X5f3EuTOelU+yhy6rPbTNK+97JOEsETP
MFw9KVf6NLc76nHKxToYla+WNY0em+m5jUKiEPhAj0o6KgP9HZplWA==
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

References:
- RIPEM 1.2
  - From: Christopher Allen <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: (fwd) Re: What's so bad about a Surveillance State?
Next by Date: Re: (fwd) Who's watching you... 01
Prev by thread: RIPEM 1.2
Next by thread: Re: RIPEM 1.2
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread