Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 02:14:40 -0400 From: "Allen Smith" <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu> To: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au>, nick@shibumi.feralmonkey.org Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Blowfish/Twofish Message-ID: <9905030214.ZM6494@beatrice.rutgers.edu> In-Reply-To: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au> "Re: Blowfish/Twofish" (May 3, 2:09am) References: <99May3.161109est.40332@border.alcanet.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 3, 2:09am, Peter Jeremy (possibly) wrote: > 0x1c <nick@shibumi.feralmonkey.org> wrote: > >On a similar note, is there any restriction on one-way hashing algorithms? > >I forget. > AFAIK, there isn't. MD4, MD5, SHA-1 etc appear to be all be freely > exportable. The export restrictions appear to be on crypto for > `secrecy', whilst crypto for `authentication' is unrestricted. > (This does suggest that some lessons in basic cryptography are > needed around the US State Department). Actually, no... as long as you assume their basic motivation is to limit _convenient_ cryptography. Remember the "cryptographic hooks" nonsense? They're pretty obviously trying to make it as hard as possible/practical for private citizens to use cryptography that the US government can't break. -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9905030214.ZM6494>