[Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting

• To: [email protected]
• Subject: [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
• From: [email protected] (Thomas von Dein)
• Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 20:30:13 +0200
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <20140813100515.GN11694@r4> <[email protected]>

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 07:47:41PM +0200, Stephan Neuhaus wrote:
> On 2014-08-13, 12:05, Thomas von Dein wrote:
> > So, now there are 5 different implementations for essentially the
> > same thing:
> 
> And even if that were true (which it might well be, didn't check),
> that's bad because...?  OpenSSL has a problem because (among other
> things) there are no real competitors.  With more, and truly different
> implementations, things *will* be different and they *might* be better.

Well, ok, I didn't see it from that viewpoint, so it's essentially a
good thing :) My bad..




best,
Tom

• References:
  • [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
    • From: [email protected] (Cathal Garvey)
  • [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
    • From: [email protected] (Thomas von Dein)
  • [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
    • From: [email protected] (Stephan Neuhaus)

• Prev by Date: [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
• Next by Date: Shipment Interdiction
• Previous by thread: [Cryptography] miniLock seems pretty interesting
• Next by thread: SSL cert expired for cpunks.org
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread