Comparison of GnuPG & NAI/PGP features.

L. Sassaman
Tue, 11 Jan 2000 17:25:38 -0500 (EST)

Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 8 Jan 2000, Werner Koch wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Jan 2000, L. Sassaman wrote:
> > Not that I use it, but what exactly is wrong with it? Has there been a
> > successful cryptanalysis, or are you just wary of anything NSA?
> Either Biham or Shamir found a design weekness within a day after the
> NSA released the code.
I didn't realise that.
> It is only 80 bits whereas the other algorithms all use 128 bit keys.
> It is not very fast.
> And there is no defined algorithm identifier for it in OpenPGP. You
> noticed the message about experimental algorithms GnuPG prints for it?
I was aware of the other points... I just wanted to know if you were against it because it ws just generally sucky, or because of some large, particular problem. I don't plan on using it either case... :)
> --
> Werner Koch at keyid 621CC013
> Boycott Amazon! -
__ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "I've done my sentence Technology Consultant | But committed no crime..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger:// | --Freddie Mercury, Queen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4e63qPYrxsgmsCmoRAlfNAKCf8U0l6xZoYF40Ief/OuGk0q61UwCgpmrO gffw943Mb2ktetqh4+fbe0c= =V5RH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----