Re: PGP 2.6 and the future

[allan@elvis.tamu.edu (Allan Bailey)]

"Perry E. Metzger" writes:
>
>Allan Bailey says:
>> I'm willing to wager that 2.6 (and maybe 2.5) MIT'd PGP versions
>> are hacked by the NSA to put in a backdoor.
>>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^ (emphasis added.)
>> 
>> I'll bet you a C-note, Perry.
>
>Done for $100.
>
>> Now how do you propose to prove or disprove this?
>
>The commonly selected way to settle such things is to select a neutral
>referee to adjudicate based on available evidence. The source code is
>public, so it should it should be trivial to read it and make a
>decision as to whether anything untoward has been done. I'll accept
>any reasonably expert referee -- my selection of choice would be Hal
>Finney since he is a well known cypherpunk, is strongly familiar with
>the code and would recognise any tampering. 

Well, Hal wanted to bet me too, but you were first.  If he's still
willing, I'll agree to him also. 

>Tampering may be defined
>given what you are claiming as the presense of what a reasonable
>cryptographer would refer to as a "back door". 

Agreed.

>Once we've settled on a judge and they've
>accepted the charge (we may need to pay the person for their time), we
>present our evidence to the person and allow them to make a decision.

Agreed.

>I'll happily bet any larger sum, too, if you like. 

I'm a University programmer/sysadmin.  I.e., poor, but with a good
InterNet connection. :)

>I'd also request
>that a neutral third party hold the stakes. At your choice the party
>can be the judge or another individual mutually acceptable.

Sounds fine with me.  If Hal, or another agreed upon judge is willing,
I'll send my cheque in.

--
Allan Bailey, allan@elvis.tamu.edu          | "Freedom is not free."
Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations | allan.bailey@tamu.edu
Esperanto: MondLingvo, lingvo internacia.