Comparison of GnuPG & NAI/PGP features.

[L. Sassaman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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 guug.de           www.gnupg.org           keyid 621CC013
>   
>      Boycott Amazon!  -  http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon.html
> 
> 

__

L. Sassaman

System Administrator                |  "I've done my sentence
Technology Consultant               |   But committed no crime..."
icq.. 10735603                      |   
pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi |    --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-----