[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: weak devices

To: karn@unix.ka9q.ampr.org (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: weak devices
From: uri@watson.ibm.com
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 19:18:58 -0500 (EST)
Cc: hugo@watson.ibm.com, IPSEC@ans.net
In-Reply-To: <199501101102.DAA15057@unix.ka9q.ampr.org> from "Phil Karn" at Jan 10, 95 03:02:09 am
Reply-To: uri@watson.ibm.com

Phil Karn says:
> >Phil, how well are these devices equipped to do modular exponentiations
> >as required for the mechanisms we discuss?
>
> Not very well, I'm afraid. But if you want the ultimate in security,
> you want to use a trusted machine even if it's slower than something
> else.

OK, then why were we discussing how fast or slow MD5 is on those
trusted but underpowered machines?
--
Regards,
Uri         uri@watson.ibm.com      N2RIU
-----------
<Disclamer>

Follow-Ups:

Re: weak devices

From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@MIT.EDU>

References:

Re: weak devices

From: Phil Karn <karn@unix.ka9q.ampr.org>

Prev by Date: Re: weak devices
Next by Date: MD5 performance limitations document
Prev by thread: Re: weak devices
Next by thread: Re: weak devices
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread