Cryptography-Digest Digest #442, Volume #11 Wed, 29 Mar 00 11:13:01 EST
Contents:
Re: Is it really NSA ?! (Tony L. Svanstrom)
Re: Schoof's Algorithm (Robert Harley)
Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited. (Taneli Huuskonen)
Re: new Echelon article (Lincoln Yeoh)
Re: NIST publishes AES3 papers (Lincoln Yeoh)
Re: prime number solution (Martin Kahlert)
Re: Does anybody know of a secure FTP server? (Lincoln Yeoh)
Re: Using Am-241 to generate random numbers ("Geir Rastad")
how to get the key and the method? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
How are these passwords? (John)
Re: new Echelon article ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Using Am-241 to generate random numbers ("Jed Rothwell")
Re: prime solution (Richard Tobin)
Re: Is it really NSA ?! (Remove NO_SPAM to reply)
Q: Differencing time series (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: Blowfish (Mark Wooding)
Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited. (James Felling)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tony L. Svanstrom)
Subject: Re: Is it really NSA ?!
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:21:59 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> just few days after i wrote about PegwitW (which i made from Pegwit)
> i got interesting record in webserver's log file:
> * User-Agent field: SpookWeb and NSA
Doesn't say a thing really, if you found InfoSnatcher/0.5 as the client
you wouldn't be able to find anything about it... That's just my
Perl-based client for doing site-scraping; and using the standard
modules that comes with Perl5 you can write a http-talking client in
under a minute, and that identifies itself as anything you want it to.
Hmmm... I think I'll rename my client 'Christians In Action'; that ought
to get some people worried. ;)
/Tony
--
/\___/\ Who would you like to read your messages today? /\___/\
\_@ @_/ Protect your privacy: <http://www.pgpi.com/> \_@ @_/
--oOO-(_)-OOo---------------------------------------------oOO-(_)-OOo--
DSS: 0x9363F1DB, Fp: 6EA2 618F 6D21 91D3 2D82 78A6 647F F247 9363 F1DB
---���---���-----------------------------------------------���---���---
\O/ \O/ �1999 <http://www.svanstrom.com/?ref=news> \O/ \O/
------------------------------
From: Robert Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Schoof's Algorithm
Date: 29 Mar 2000 13:09:17 +0200
"Michael Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This program counts the number of points on an elliptic curve defined over
> the field GF(2^m). It does NOT represent the state of the art [...]
> However it can find a cryptographically suitable
> curve, with a near-prime number of points over say GF(2^191) in a
> "reasonable" length of time on a Pentium III 450MHz, typically on an
> over-night run.
I'm working on an *extremely* fast point counting program, also for
curves over fields GF(2^m). When it's ready, counting a random curve
over GF(2^191) ought to take about one minute on a similar PC. Just
now I ran ten examples over GF(2^120) on my 500 MHz Alpha and they
took 2.6 seconds each.
I expect to release a demo version in a few weeks (and will announce
it here in sci.crypt). I am also seeking commercial interest in
licenses to use "the real thing".
Bye,
Rob.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Taneli Huuskonen)
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.crypto
Subject: Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited.
Date: 29 Mar 2000 14:36:22 +0300
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anthony Stephen Szopa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>This first semester will concentrate on the random digit generator.
This morning I wrote a programme that simulates breaking yours. It
generates random digits using your method, stores output samples in an
array, then passes the array to a subroutine that calculates more output
digits from it (not using the permutations, of course) and checks the
result. It's about a hundred lines of C code altogether.
It wouldn't be fair to suggest any more bets, but I'm willing to
demonstrate to you (and anyone who cares to watch) that my attack works.
Taneli Huuskonen
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOOHqWF+t0CYLfLaVEQK7EgCfQu2HCSSFIzlSjUFxZYpQipYJY4UAn0Xx
Di14am9mgl8BJgtMOcFUd8gi
=12iu
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
--
I don't | All messages will be PGP signed, | Fight for your right to
speak for | encrypted mail preferred. Keys: | use sealed envelopes.
the Uni. | http://www.helsinki.fi/~huuskone/ | http://www.gilc.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lincoln Yeoh)
Subject: Re: new Echelon article
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:35:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 11:09:53 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Is there anyway to insert crypto hardware into cellphones?
Well I know someone who modified his phone to do strong crypto when he
dialled a particular number. Not sure about the details.
I'm wondering if GSM phones can be modified so that the "fixed bits" can be
"unfixed". Would that require changes at the exchange too?
I get the impression that everything becomes plaintext at the GSM exchange,
and then reencrypted. So it's not much point anyway if you want encryption
all the way.
Am I wrong?
Cheerio,
Link.
****************************
Reply to: @Spam to
lyeoh at @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pop.jaring.my @
*******************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lincoln Yeoh)
Subject: Re: NIST publishes AES3 papers
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:46:43 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:48:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Schneier)
wrote:
>They have not always said that. They started saying that recently,
>and hopefully it will not happen.
Well I hope there will be more than one.
Go super encryption go :). That's what 1 GHz cpus are for, not for stupid
animations of paper clips.
Cheerio,
Link.
****************************
Reply to: @Spam to
lyeoh at @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pop.jaring.my @
*******************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Kahlert)
Subject: Re: prime number solution
Date: 29 Mar 2000 12:52:05 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <8brrv1$i9l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I offer the following solution to prime numbers.
> This solution, as trivial as it is, has been
> hidden from us until now. I hope people
> appreciate what it takes to keep this hidden for
> so long.
>
> A(n)=6*n-1
> B(n)=6*n+1
> for all n=1,2,3...
> A and B define the "possible prime space."
I am missing the 3 somehow.
>
> So everything is prime unless it is the
> combination of two other things in this set.
Everything is prime unless it is the combination
of primes. Sound's quite logical.
> Another interesting thing:
>
> A()*A()=B()
> B()*B()=B()
> A()*B()=A()
>
> So any p^2-1 is divisible by 6.
3^2-1 = 8.
I assume, that there are a lot of more primes than 3 that
you left out.
Bye,
Martin.
--
The early bird gets the worm. If you want something else for
breakfast, get up later.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lincoln Yeoh)
Subject: Re: Does anybody know of a secure FTP server?
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:21:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 00:48:41 GMT, Abid Farooqui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Secondly, you mentioned that the best solution is to use Https to transfer files.
>The problem there is that I want my users to be able to upload files to the
>webserver as well as download them from the webserver. I would in this case have to
>write a trusted Java applet that can access local machine's I/O and thus give them
>the ability to select the files that they want to upload to the webserver securely.
No java applet is needed. Just send the following form to the client
<form ENCTYPE="multipart/form-data" name=uploadform method=post
action="cgi-bin/upload">
<input type=File name="uploadedfile" size=20>
<input type="submit" value="Upload">
</form>
Then write the required CGI program (perl + CGI.pm may help), and voila.
Works transparently whether with http or https.
I don't recommend SSL ftp because you WILL have problems going through
firewalls. And firewalls are rather common nowadays.
Ftp is not straightforward because the protocol involves TWO connections,
and there are also two flavours in the protocol, PORT and PASV.
For PORT,
Client makes control connection to server.
Client _tells_ the server where it will be listening and the server makes
the data connection to client to do the actual transfer.
For PASV
Client makes both connections. But the server tells the client where to
connect to.
Thus for normal unencrypted ftp to work through NAT devices (some firewalls
use network address translation), the devices have to actually look at the
ftp conversation, and change the relevant bits. This would be rather
difficult for SSL'ed ftp.
For normal unencrypted ftp to work through a typical firewall ftp proxy,
you have to connect to the firewall proxy first and then only go out.
Either that or the firewall may transparently intercept the communications
(in which case often there will be the same problem as with NAT, esp if the
protected network is using non Internet reachable addresses). Thus you may
have to write a ssl ftp proxy where the SSL connections terminate at the
proxy and new connections are made from there.
So the situation is:
if your client is behind a NAT firewall, you should use PASV SSL ftp, that
way the firewall doesn't need to look at what the client says. It just
passes what the server says to the client and the client makes the
connection, and things are good.
But if the server is ALSO behind a NAT firewall you're screwed. Because the
server will be telling the client to connect to A,B,C,D,X,Y and the
server's NAT firewall isn't going to be able to change those to the right
values.
Summary:
The client behind NAT would prefer PASV SSL ftp.
The server behind NAT would prefer PORT SSL ftp.
If NAT is on both sides, you're screwed.
Proxying firewalls - requires custom ssl ftp proxy.
Transparent proxying firewall - similar to NAT problem.
As you can see SSL'ized ftp is not a firewall friendly protocol. Don't use
it unless you really have to.
I wonder why they decided to use two connections for FTP. I guess so you
can abort transfers? But so many servers don't seem to handle aborts
properly anyway.
Cheerio,
Link.
****************************
Reply to: @Spam to
lyeoh at @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pop.jaring.my @
*******************************
------------------------------
From: "Geir Rastad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Using Am-241 to generate random numbers
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:38:17 +0200
... And BTW, there are signifficant delays in broadcasted signals so you and
your pal won't have the same data stream at the same time, and maybe the AD
converters doesn't produce the same data ?
"Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8brg30$s9k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Most codes and ciphers depend upon random numbers. Some of the most
secure,
> top secret codes used by embassies depend upon long lists of random
numbers.
> A correspondent of mine once generated paper tapes filled with random
> numbers by comparing variances between a computer real-time clock and
cycles
> on the power mains. The digits were tested for random distribution and
then
> the paper tapes were shipped off in diplomatic bags. I believe these lists
> are referred to as "codebooks." (Anyway, I will call them that here.)
>
> I have been thinking about various novel ways to produce a codebook, to
> generate a perfect "one-time pad," that is, a code (not cipher) which can
> never broken without stealing the codebook.
>
> Computer pseudo random number generators (PNRG) are not truly random, and
> eventually the sequence repeats. Even when a PNRG is re-seeded from the
real
> time clock, theoretically, someone might determine the PNRG algorithm and
> crack your message. As a practical problem, that might be as difficult
than
> factoring 128-bit RSA keys, but as an intellectual challenge I would like
to
> find a naturally occurring source of real random numbers.
>
> One method would be to monitor ionization smoke detector voltage, or
perhaps
> use a radiation meter with a smoke detector. (A smoke detector *is* a
> radiation meter but it might not be sensitive enough.) The detector would
> kept in clean, stable air or a vacuum chamber. Smoke detectors contain 0.2
> milligrams of americium-241 oxide. The total voltage level is not random:
it
> is a function of the number of particles in the air. However, the precise
> number of disintegrations per second, and the resulting signal strength
and
> fluctuations of the lower digits on your meter are as random as anything
can
> be, according to basic physics.
>
> A friend suggested a more sophisticated, custom-made solution along the
same
> lines: "I think a superior method would to drive a very fast flip-flop or
> counter (cascaded flip-flops) by a high (and either non-uniform or
uniform)
> frequency signal, and then sample the counter at the time an event is
sensed
> on a very fast (low latency time) radiation counter. The counter would
have
> to be driven by a frequency that is high in relation to the event
occurrence
> rate. The driving frequency can be over a GHz, so the pad bit generation
> speed could easily be well over 1 Mbs even with a simple flip-flop used as
> the counter." He added: "This could be packaged into a nice small DIP for
> inclusion on a motherboard or board, and used for real time gaming,
> simulation, as well as cryptographic applications."
>
> The trouble with using the power mains or a radiation source for a code is
> that you must generate the codebook in one location, and then physically
> ship a copy of it to another. Your friend must have the codebook in hand
> before he can send you a message. That takes time, and someone along the
way
> might intercept the disk and copy it without your knowledge. What we
really
> want is a method of generating the codebook at two locations
simultaneously
> and secretly, in a way that could never be repeated by a third party.
>
> Here is an idea that is impractical but fun to think about. You could
focus
> two radiotelescopes on a point source that varies randomly in a clearly
> pronounced binary (on, off) fashion. I'm not sure what phenomenon does
this,
> but there must be many. You and your friend meet and agree that at fixed
> times you will monitor and record the process. The reason this works is
> because there are millions of targets (out of 10^20 stars), so no one
would
> never know which particular target you are focused on or when you start
> monitoring, and once they miss the chance to monitor it, the opportunity
is
> gone forever.
>
> There may be other sources of random noise source broadcast on radio,
> com-sat, or Internet that you and your correspondent could both tune into
> anonymously, such as the last 4 digits of the Dow Jones industrial
average,
> or the temperature readings in Ithaca NY on the weather Channel web page.
> These would not be good candidates because they are recorded permanently
and
> someone could reconstruct your codebook after they found out your source
of
> numbers. You might find some transient source of numbers too large to be
> recorded. I do not think any organization has the capacity to record all
> digital TV broadcasts from all com-sat channels, for example.
>
> Suppose you selected something like the temperature in Ithaca. A 3-digit
> temperature rate of change is far too slow to generate as many numbers as
> you need, so a variation on this approach might be used. With some random
> number generators, you can deliberately force a particular sequence from a
> given seed. A generator produces billions of numbers (or trillions) in a
> sequence that eventually repeats. Some generators allow you to go to a
> particular spot in the sequence, starting out a position number
55,122,662,
> let us say. You tell it to go to a particular spot based on the
temperature
> in Ithaca, and so does your friend, and the two of you generate the same
> sequence. You and your friend force a new seed from Ithaca every 100
> numbers, or 1000 numbers, and you come up with exactly the same random
> sequence very quickly. You could do it any time you like without mailing
> anything.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: how to get the key and the method?
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:38:33 +0200
hi
i have an original word (clear) and the encryption of that word (and a
lot of them in fact) but now, how could i get the key and the method
transforming the original ones (clear ones) to the encrypted ones ?
ie, are there any programs doing it ?
Fred, brussels (reply in newsgroup)
------------------------------
Subject: How are these passwords?
From: John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 06:54:49 -0800
I've tested the passwords...
meuliom, as it has duel letters, I tried meulion. These
passwords seem to (mathematically) be bad with many encryption
schemes. How do I know a good and bad choice?
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: new Echelon article
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 16:01:35 +0100
Is there anyway you can put me in contact with this someone or obrain
information on how he went about doing this?
As far as I know GSM data encryption works between phones, the exchange does
not do any encryption.
Thanks,
-Jared
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 11:09:53 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Is there anyway to insert crypto hardware into cellphones?
>
> Well I know someone who modified his phone to do strong crypto when he
> dialled a particular number. Not sure about the details.
>
> I'm wondering if GSM phones can be modified so that the "fixed bits" can be
> "unfixed". Would that require changes at the exchange too?
>
> I get the impression that everything becomes plaintext at the GSM exchange,
> and then reencrypted. So it's not much point anyway if you want encryption
> all the way.
>
> Am I wrong?
>
> Cheerio,
>
> Link.
> ****************************
> Reply to: @Spam to
> lyeoh at @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> pop.jaring.my @
> *******************************
------------------------------
From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Using Am-241 to generate random numbers
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:13:55 -0500
Geir Rastad wrote:
> ... And BTW, there are signifficant delays in broadcasted signals so you
and
> your pal won't have the same data stream at the same time, and maybe the
AD
> converters doesn't produce the same data ?
Well, I was not too serious about that proposal; it was blue sky speculation
(literally). The part about Am-241 is more practical. I see in the FAQ at:
http://www.rsasecurity.com
. . . that people already use radioactive sources to generate random numbers
for Vernam ciphers and other applications. Obviously I was not the first to
come up with the idea, but my point is that it might be more economical and
easier now that cheap AD converters and ionizing smoke alarms are common. In
the past, acquiring and managing radioactive materials was somewhat
hazardous.
Regarding the data stream and AD problems, with the astronomical technique I
suppose you would send ~100 bytes to synchronize. (You would encode the 100
bytes with previous day's code.) To circumvent the AD converter problem, I
would ignore a random signal close to the middle. Suppose you are creating
random noise one bit at a time, and the AD converter generates random values
ranging from 1 to 15. I would set the bit to 0 for any value between 1 and
5, ignore 6 - 10, and set 1 for 11 - 15.
- Jed
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Tobin)
Crossposted-To: sci.math
Subject: Re: prime solution
Date: 29 Mar 2000 15:44:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A(n)=6*n-1
>B(n)=6*n+1
Oh no, it's http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=341544173&fmt=text again.
-- Richard
--
Spam filter: to mail me from a .com/.net site, put my surname in the headers.
"The Internet is really just a series of bottlenecks joined by high
speed networks." - Sam Wilson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Remove NO_SPAM to reply)
Subject: Re: Is it really NSA ?!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Remove NO_SPAM to reply)
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 16:00:33 GMT
Doug Stell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DS> On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:38:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DS> wrote:
>>just few days after i wrote about PegwitW (which i made from Pegwit)
>>i got interesting record in webserver's log file:
>>208.153.72.142 - - [28/Mar/2000:09:12:48 +0200] "GET /pegwit/ HTTP/1.0" 200 3257 "-"
>"SpookWeb v1.0b (NSA)"
>>so i wonder if it really is NSA ?!
DS> ....
>>* it downloaded only executable, but not source code
DS> It most likely wasn't the NSA, for the following reasons.
DS> 1. If they did visit your site, you would never know it.
You assume that they try to keep everything they do completely secret.
I _have_ been visited by the NSA (well, actually the NCSC). It shows
up in logs, etc. Maybe they could have failed to register their name,
but I'm sure an Arin would have been just fine for narrowing things
down quite a bit.
Why is it that everyone assumes the NSA is godlike? Keep in mind, it
is an organization run by humans. And those humans work for the
government, so they can't be too smart, can they? (Ok, so I'm being
a bit sarcastic. Just tired of hearing how the NSA has complete
control of anything electronic.)
Damian Menscher
--
--==## Grad. student & Sys. Admin. @ U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ##==--
--==## <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.uiuc.edu/~menscher/ Ofc:(217)333-0038 ##==--
--==## Physics Dept, 1110 W Green, Urbana IL 61801 Fax:(217)333-9819 ##==--
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: sci.stat.math
Subject: Q: Differencing time series
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 18:11:58 +0200
1. If one applies the difference filter of n-th order to the
white noise process, obtaining d_t and compute the bit
sequence
b_t = if d_t < 0 then 0 else 1 fi
is b_t a uniformly distributed (truly) random bit sequence?
2. The same as (1), except applying to a MA or ARMA process.
3. Is there reasonable prospect of obtaining good quality random
bit sequences this way from the majority of time series
available in practice? If yes, is there any value of n, the
order of the filter, that is the minimum for obtaining
satisfactory results according to experiences?
Many thanks in advance.
M. K. Shen
============================
http://home.t-online.de/home/mok-kong.shen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Wooding)
Subject: Re: Blowfish
Date: 29 Mar 2000 16:06:06 GMT
Thomas Luzat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm currently writing a Blowfish implementation and I am now wondering
> which key sizes are allowed or given by "the Blowfish standard". I
> only know that the key can be up to 448 bits in size... Do the key
> sizes have to be multiples of 32 bits, 64 bits or something like that?
The original definition specified that the key had to be a multiple of
32 bits in length. However, the official test vectors, generated using
Eric Young's reference implementation, understands keys whose length is
any multiple of 8 bits (up to the maximum of 448 bits).
The generalization needed for this is fairly simple. Assume that the
word array P can be considered as an octet array using a big-endian
convention. Then simply XOR in octets from the key into consecutive
octets of P, looping back round to the start of the key when you run off
the end.
Bear in mind that not all implementations will be able to understand
Blowfish keys which aren't a multiple of 32 bits in length, and may
behave in surprising and undesirable ways when faced with such a thing.
-- [mdw]
------------------------------
From: James Felling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.crypto
Subject: Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited.
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:06:09 -0600
I would like to ask you why even a text book analisys of your program
seems to indicate that it does not provide the security that you claim
give a basic knowlegde of the way it works.
There are structural artifacts of your RNG all over it. I have devoted
about 1/2 hour to analisys of it and while I have not developed an
effective attack( though I feel such could be developed easily), I have
noted that there are (with the current 6 primitives) substantial leaks
in the cypher stream.
1)Given a knowledge of the form of the starting list of all permutations
used. a single mix file after a full shuffling is compromised in ~10!
attempts. This means that at best your security is equivalent to
(log(2 fullly secure mix files *10!))/log 2 bits vs. known plaintext,
and possibly as low as 3( log(10!))/log2 ?= ~90( sorry no log function
acailable to me now) bits.( with sulficient known plaintext against my
admitiedly unsophisticated attack)
Anthony Stephen Szopa wrote:
> OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited.
>
> Thank you for attending the first class in the first semester of
> OAP-L3 encryption software package.
>
> This first semester will concentrate on the random digit generator.
>
> Here is your first assignment: you must have obtained either
> OAP-L3 or OAR-L3 and read the Help Files and completed all
> tutorials in all the Help Files.
>
> You can obtain OAR-L3 by downloading it directly at
> http://www.ciphile.com from the Downloads Currently Available
> web page.
>
> You can get OAP-L3 by going to the Pricing & Ordering web page and
> clicking on the blue anchor tag in the third paragraph and sending
> us the email with the preprinted statement in the subject header.
> (Read the License Agreement web page.)
>
> If you wish to be recognized you must post concise points for
> discussion or questions that do not in any way indicate that
> you do not have the software or have not completed the tutorials.
> If I think you are making a point or asking a question that
> indicates you have not done your homework you will not be
> recognized.
>
> None of you should expect any of us to entertain you if you have
> not done your homework while the rest of us have.
>
> Class has ended and will resume within a week. Hope to see you
> here.
>
> Title of next week's class: OAP-L3: Class #2 - Very Brief
> Introduction then we will proceed with Mr. Huuskonen's point about
> the random number generator possibly having a weakness.
>
> Thank you.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and sci.crypt) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
End of Cryptography-Digest Digest
******************************
