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

Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)

To: [email protected] (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Subject: Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)
From: [email protected] (Futplex)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 04:45:18 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Jon Lasser" at Aug 10, 95 01:25:09 am
Reply-To: [email protected] (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Sender: [email protected]

Jon writes:
> Two other possibilities: (1) It's merely an independently produced 
> cryptosystem disguised as a "leak" to save its creator the trouble of 
> asking experts to analyze it for him/her.  

It strikes me as rather foolish to mail off anonymous copies to several
individual recipients (Matt, Perry, Tim, ...) in addition to the list, if
S1 is a real leak. Why aid the traffic analysts by firing off multiple
messages through the remailers ?

BTW, the code has been posted to Usenet by a Frank Falstaff -- look for
message ID <[email protected]> in sci.crypt (Wed, Aug. 9, 1995).
His article refers to a message ID (namely <[email protected]>)
that differs from the message ID of the copy sent to c'punks. So it looks
like there was at least one additional recipient. That's a minimum of 5
originals so far....

-Futplex

References:
- Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)
  - From: Jon Lasser <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: "S-1" key schedule
Next by Date: Re: "S-1" key schedule
Prev by thread: Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)
Next by thread: Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread