cryptography  

Messages by Date

• 2002/11/03 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Jonathan S. Shapiro
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Julien WILK
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Adam Shostack
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Jonathan S. Shapiro
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Adam Shostack
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Jonathan S. Shapiro
• 2002/11/02 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Jonathan S. Shapiro
• 2002/11/01 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Ron Luman II
• 2002/11/01 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Jim Hughes
• 2002/11/01 Re: patents IanG
• 2002/11/01 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure Mark Miller
• 2002/10/31 patents R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/31 Re: Windows 2000 declared secure ji
• 2002/10/31 Windows 2000 declared secure Peter Gutmann
• 2002/10/30 Re: patent free(?) anonymous credential system pre-print Adam Back
• 2002/10/30 Re: M-209 for sale on EBay Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/30 Treacherous Computing Masterclass: London, November 7th Seth Johnson
• 2002/10/29 patent free(?) anonymous credential system pre-print R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/29 E-C Logix: current patent holder for the DigiCash patents? R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/29 RSA Attacks? (was: Attacks on AES) Martin F Krafft
• 2002/10/29 Attacks on AES Martin F Krafft
• 2002/10/28 Re: M-209 for sale on EBay Jim Gillogly
• 2002/10/28 Re: M-209 for sale? Jim Hughes
• 2002/10/28 Re: M-209 for sale on EBay Richard Johnson
• 2002/10/28 Re: M-209 for sale on EBay Matt Crawford
• 2002/10/27 Re: M-209 for sale on EBay Jeffrey I. Schiller
• 2002/10/27 M-209 for sale on EBay Steve Bellovin
• 2002/10/25 Re: more snake oil? [WAS: New uncrackable(?) encryption technique] Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/25 USDOD Stego Solicitation reusch
• 2002/10/25 Re: more snake oil? [WAS: New uncrackable(?) encryption technique] bear
• 2002/10/25 Re: more snake oil? [WAS: New uncrackable(?) encryption technique] Nicko van Someren
• 2002/10/25 more snake oil? [WAS: New uncrackable(?) encryption technique] Udhay Shankar N
• 2002/10/24 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/24 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/24 collision resistance -- Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/24 Re: collision resistance -- Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? David Wagner
• 2002/10/24 Re: collision resistance -- Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/24 Re: comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks?) Adam Back
• 2002/10/24 STORK CRYPTOGRAPHY WORKSHOP: preliminary program Antoon Bosselaers
• 2002/10/24 Re: comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks?) Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/24 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? David Wagner
• 2002/10/24 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? David Wagner
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Wei Dai
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/23 Re: comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks?) Adam Back
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Wei Dai
• 2002/10/23 Re: comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistantto birthday attacks?) Jack Lloyd
• 2002/10/23 Draft NIST Special Publication 800-38B available for public comment Morris Dworkin
• 2002/10/23 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? bear
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks?) Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Greg Rose
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"?? (Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) Tal Garfinkel
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 comparing RMAC to AES+CBC-MAC or XCBC (Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks?) Adam Back
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Wei Dai
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"??(Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Victor.Duchovni
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"??(Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) alan
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Wei Dai
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"?? (Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) Rick Wash
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"??(Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) alan
• 2002/10/22 Re: Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"?? (Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) Nelson Minar
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? bear
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/22 Palladium -- trivially weak in hw but "secure in software"?? (Re: palladium presentation - anyone going?) Adam Back
• 2002/10/22 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Victor.Duchovni
• 2002/10/21 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Aram Perez
• 2002/10/21 Re: Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Adam Back
• 2002/10/21 Why is RMAC resistant to birthday attacks? Victor.Duchovni
• 2002/10/21 Re: palladium presentation - anyone going? Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/21 Palladium Peter Clay
• 2002/10/21 Re: palladium presentation - anyone going? Adam Back
• 2002/10/20 Re: palladium presentation - anyone going? Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/19 2003 PKI Research Workshop CFP Carl Ellison
• 2002/10/18 Re: QuizID? Adam Fields
• 2002/10/18 Wired on Lucky's palladium patents... Perry E. Metzger
• 2002/10/18 Re: QuizID? bear
• 2002/10/17 palladium presentation - anyone going? Adam Back
• 2002/10/17 Re: QuizID? Rich Salz
• 2002/10/17 Re: QuizID? Nicko van Someren
• 2002/10/17 Re: QuizID? Adam Shostack
• 2002/10/17 RE: QuizID? Trei, Peter
• 2002/10/17 QuizID? Marc Branchaud
• 2002/10/16 ANNOUNCE: PureTLS version 0.9b3 Eric Rescorla
• 2002/10/16 [IP] Former FBI chief takes on encryption Perry E. Metzger
• 2002/10/16 Re: [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM, October 15, 2002 Sidney Markowitz
• 2002/10/16 Re: [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM, October15, 2002 Pete Chown
• 2002/10/16 RE: [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM, October 15, 2002 Dean, James
• 2002/10/16 Re: [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM, October 15, 2002 Greg Rose
• 2002/10/16 Re: [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM,October 15, 2002 Bill Frantz
• 2002/10/15 [Bruce Schneier <[email protected]>] CRYPTO-GRAM, October 15, 2002 Perry E. Metzger
• 2002/10/15 Crypto in court Friday Russell Nelson
• 2002/10/15 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/15 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/15 Digital Identity Forum programme R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/15 Input requested for second edition of "Firewalls and Internet Security" Steve Bellovin
• 2002/10/15 Re: open source CAs? Joris Ballet
• 2002/10/15 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows bear
• 2002/10/15 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/15 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Arnold G. Reinhold
• 2002/10/15 Re: open source CAs? Stefan Kelm
• 2002/10/15 US DOD Crypto related SBIRS reusch
• 2002/10/10 CFP -- IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy Steve Bellovin
• 2002/10/10 Re: open source CAs? Henrik Andreasson
• 2002/10/10 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Ed Gerck
• 2002/10/10 Re: open source CAs? Derek Atkins
• 2002/10/10 RE: open source CAs? Graeme . Burnett
• 2002/10/10 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Dan Riley
• 2002/10/10 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Roy M. Silvernail
• 2002/10/10 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Joseph Ashwood
• 2002/10/10 Re: open source CAs? Michael H. Warfield
• 2002/10/10 Re: open source CAs? Stefan Mink
• 2002/10/10 Re: open source CAs? Leif Johansson
• 2002/10/10 Mitnick starts security company R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/10 CFP: Security in Distributed Computing Special Track of PODC 2003 Amir Herzberg
• 2002/10/09 open source CAs? Perry E. Metzger
• 2002/10/09 Re: Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows Roy M . Silvernail
• 2002/10/08 Microsoft marries RSA Security to Windows R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/07 [OT Canute] Re: [LINK] [Fwd: Interesting KPMG report on DRM] Trei, Peter
• 2002/10/07 Proofs of security R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/07 Re: [LINK] [Fwd: Interesting KPMG report on DRM] Robin Whittle
• 2002/10/06 Interesting KPMG report on DRM Peter Gutmann
• 2002/10/05 Net Security Interview with Jon Callas R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/05 Re: The 3rd Annual Consult Hyperion Digital Identity Forum David G.W. Birch
• 2002/10/05 Re: Gaelic Code Talkers Bill Stewart
• 2002/10/05 RE: JYA ping R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/04 new copyright bill... Perry E. Metzger
• 2002/10/04 cryptome.org Loughry, Joe
• 2002/10/03 Confidentiality as a goal of old telegraph codes Steve Bellovin
• 2002/10/03 Re: The 3rd Annual Consult Hyperion Digital Identity Forum R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/03 RE: JYA ping R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/03 Re: Gaelic Code Talkers John Kelsey
• 2002/10/03 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Jeremey Barrett
• 2002/10/03 RE: What email encryption is actually in use? Udhay Shankar N
• 2002/10/03 Re: Gaelic Code Talkers bear
• 2002/10/03 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? bear
• 2002/10/03 The 3rd Annual Consult Hyperion Digital Identity Forum R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/03 [dgc.chat] New Release of NeuDist R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/03 JYA ping R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/03 Quantum cryptography takes to the skies Udhay Shankar N
• 2002/10/03 RE: What email encryption is actually in use? Lucky Green
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? RL 'Bob' Morgan
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Simon Josefsson
• 2002/10/02 Re: Optical analog computing? David Honig
• 2002/10/02 Gaelic Code Talkers Bill Frantz
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Ben Laurie
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Adam Shostack
• 2002/10/02 Re: Optical analog computing? Steven M. Bellovin
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Steven M. Bellovin
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? John Saylor
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Paul Krumviede
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Jeremey Barrett
• 2002/10/02 Re: Optical analog computing? Greg Rose
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Jeremey Barrett
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Udhay Shankar N
• 2002/10/02 ECHELON news Udhay Shankar N
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Matthew Byng-Maddick
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Jeremey Barrett
• 2002/10/02 VeriSign Sells CALEA-Ware to Arrival, Cellular Mobile Systems,and First Cellular R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/02 Re: What email encryption is actually in use? Bill Stewart
• 2002/10/02 Re: Optical analog computing? John S. Denker
• 2002/10/01 Optical analog computing? R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Bill Stewart
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Sampo Syreeni
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Ben Laurie
• 2002/10/01 Cryptome Carsten Kuckuk
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Bram Cohen
• 2002/10/01 Operation RoadDevil: Secret Service probes wireless networks inWashington R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Paul Krumviede
• 2002/10/01 Re: Real-world steganography Jeremey Barrett
• 2002/09/30 Re: Real-world steganography Adam Shostack
• 2002/09/30 Re: Real-world steganography Paul Krumviede
• 2002/09/30 Real-world steganography Peter Gutmann
• 2002/09/30 Re: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Bill Stewart
• 2002/09/27 Re: [SIMSOFT] machine shop -Biometrics Slouches Toward the Mainstream David Honig
• 2002/09/27 Re: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Greg Rose
• 2002/09/27 RE: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Peter Clay
• 2002/09/27 RE: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Trei, Peter
• 2002/09/27 Re: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Ralf-P. Weinmann
• 2002/09/27 RE: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Lucky Green
• 2002/09/26 Re: RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. John Gilmore
• 2002/09/26 Re: [SIMSOFT] machine shop -Biometrics Slouches Toward theMainstream Bill Frantz
• 2002/09/26 [SIMSOFT] machine shop -Biometrics Slouches Toward the Mainstream R. A. Hettinga
• 2002/09/26 RSA's RC5-64 Secret Key Challenge has been solved. Trei, Peter
• 2002/09/26 Re: unforgeable optical tokens? John Kelsey
• 2002/09/26 Re: unforgeable optical tokens? John Kelsey
• 2002/09/25 [CYBERIA] Call for Chapters for book series R. A. Hettinga

[Earlier messages] [Later messages]