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

Re: liability for selling bad crypto?

To: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: liability for selling bad crypto?
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:02:56 -0400
cc: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>, ipsec@tis.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 12 May 1998 22:04:01 PDT." <199805130504.WAA06688@greatdane.cisco.com>
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

Daniel Harkins writes:
>   Ah yes, after being foiled in their "shareholder protection" class
> action suits filed after a stock drops and realizing that the y2k hype 
> is likely to not engender much support in the courts these parasites
> are looking for a nice thick vein to suck dry.

More power to them. Any company selling 40 bit crypto deserves what it 
gets, good and hard. It is, as I've said, very close to fraud, if not
actual fraud.

Perry

Follow-Ups:

Re: liability for selling bad crypto?

From: David Jablon <dpj@world.std.com>

References:

Re: liability for selling bad crypto?

From: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@cisco.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Latest AH/ESP/Arch drafts and changes
Next by Date: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipsec-esp-v2-05.txt
Prev by thread: Re: liability for selling bad crypto?
Next by thread: Re: liability for selling bad crypto?
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread