[3744] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Wassenaar vs. CipherSaber
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Sulzberger)
Mon Dec 7 20:15:37 1998
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 17:15:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Sulzberger <jays@panix.com>
To: "Arnold G. Reinhold" <reinhold@world.std.com>
cc: Steve Bellovin <smb@research.att.com>, jim@acm.org, cryptography@c2.net
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.03.9812071608450.15253-100000@panix3.panix.com>
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Jay Sulzberger wrote:
>
> I think that the most important thing here is just a very simple as nearly
> bombproof as we know how to build encryption/decryption program whose file
> formats I can understand after reading one page, and whose algorithms I
> can code correctly in my favorite language in under a week's work. The
> most important part of this program is the documentation, indeed the
> program could be left out, and the documentation would serve the same
> purpose.
>
> Jay Sulzberger <jays@panix.com>
Of course, this is close to CipherSaber, but what I meant is a complete
system, so that the module, component, or, as mathematicians call it, the
function, could be built and debugged in a week. Perhaps PGP can be, but
to me it always looked heavy and difficult to grasp. Likely it performs
some functions which require some weight. It is a separate question as to
why PGP is not simply integrated properly into every copy of Pine and
every copy of, what are the W9* and Mac equivalents?
Jay Sulzberger <jays@panix.com>
