[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NYT on Netscape Crack
[email protected] writes:
> Andrew Loewenstern <[email protected]> writes:
> > Oh, can we now expect to see source to at least the security portions of
> > Navigator and the Commerce server?
> An excellent proposal.
Not especially usefull. The bulk of the security problems won't
obviously have anything to do with the "security" portion of the code.
> Save Ian and David the effort of reverse engineering it again (which
> it is obviously pointless, and more: mathematically impossible, to do),
What do you mean, mathematically impossible? Thats silly.
> Or if that doesn't sit well with copyright interests, how about
> writing up an open spec about how the random number generator works?
> Then we can critique it.
That makes good sense, but I doubt they are that sensible. I also
worry that they would try to do something like patenting obvious and
long used techniques to "protect" themselves.
Perry