Re: USAF wants to violate federal criminal law

["Wilfred L. Guerin" <wilfredguerin@xxxxxxxxx>]

if that was the case, kids, then how does the client read it? Your DHS
airport x-ray machines are a third type of "accepts interference", not
to mention whatever is in your belly.

Try wrapping 1 bit encryption keys in infinite wrappers, and see if
hushmail.ai makes any difference.

Welcome to New Haven-Co.

Traffic on a single wire is only a wire. Especially when the entire
sytem is a false ploy to begin with.

hilariously, DieBold!


On 5/18/08, Ben Wilhelm <zorba-tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Wilfred L. Guerin wrote:
>> Even worse, you read FCC Part 15 rules and ask "why would I WANT it to
>> ACCEPT INTERFERENCE??"
>
> You may want to read
> http://www.proz.com/kudoz/english/electronics_elect_eng/1105076-device_must_accept_any_interference_received.html
> for information on what "accept interference" means. Basically, it means
> that it must not explode or melt down - not that it must take orders
> from arbitrary other people and send them your credit card numbers.
>
>  > This httpS message sends the wire negotiated encryption key over the
>  > wire WITH the "encrypted" data. Do you frequently write the lock
>  > combination on the safe or tape the key to the lock when it is left in
>  > hostile environments?
>
> I think you really, really need to go learn more about cryptography and
> the https protocol, as there's no point where what you described
> actually happens. The closest is when the client sends a chunk of random
> data to the server, which they both use to generate the encryption keys
> . . . and this only happens once it's already encrypted by the server's
> public key, meaning nobody besides the server can read it.
>
> As a side note, HTTPS is basically HTTP wrapped in an SSL/TLS session .
> . . and guess what Tor uses? If it's as insecure as you claim, Tor is
> pretty hilariously broken.
>
> -Ben
>