Bugtraq mailing list archives

Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!

From: sameer () c2 org (sameer)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 12:30:12 -0800 (PST)


ftp.csua.berkeley.edu:/pub/cypherpunks/ciphers/rc4.c
ftp.csua.berkeley.edu:/pub/cypherpunks/ciphers/rc4.h

-- 
sameer                                          Voice:   510-841-2014
Network Administrator                           Pager:   510-321-1014
Community ConneXion: The NEXUS-Berkeley         Dialin:  510-549-1383
http://www.c2.org (or login as "guest")                 sameer () c2 org

Current thread:

Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! der Mouse (Mar 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Software Test Account (Mar 16)
  - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Perry E. Metzger (Mar 16)
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Stan Barber (Mar 16)
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! smb () research att com (Mar 17)
  - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! John F. Haugh II (Mar 25)
    - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! sameer (Mar 25)
    - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Software Test Account (Mar 25)
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Jake Hill (Mar 17)
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! John B. Brown (Mar 17)
  - GNU finger 1.37 executes ~/.fingerrc with gid root Thomas Roessler (Mar 17)
    - Re: GNU finger 1.37 executes ~/.fingerrc with gid root Christian Wettergren (Mar 20)
    - cancel subscription Saeid Sadeghi (Mar 20)
  - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Julian Assange (Mar 17)
  - nfsbug leaving file systems mounted Dr. Frederick B. Cohen (Mar 18)
- Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! John B. Brown (Mar 17)
  - Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?! Perry E. Metzger (Mar 18)