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

Re: MDx signatures

To: "William Allen Simpson" <bsimpson@morningstar.com>
Subject: Re: MDx signatures
From: "Angelos D. Keromytis" <kermit@forthnet.gr>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 1995 21:14:06 +0300
Cc: ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 Sep 1995 15:50:38 GMT." <199509161716.AA56369@interlock.ans.net>

In message <199509161716.AA56369@interlock.ans.net>, "William Allen Simpson" wr
ites:
>Only MD5 will be included everywhere, and although many folks are using
>them for initial testing, I think that we should not make them mandatory
>as a signature function, but instead specify PGP instead.
>
Still, it might be a "quick and dirty" way to setup a secure communications
path...the down side is that ppl might go around using only this and avoid
the stronger authentication forms, but i know i'd like to have the ability
to do this.
-Angelos

References:

Re: MDx signatures

From: "William Allen Simpson" <bsimpson@morningstar.com>

Prev by Date: Re: MDx signatures
Next by Date: Re: Photuris questions
Prev by thread: Re: MDx signatures
Next by thread: Photuris - deriving per-algorithm keys
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread