Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:46:13 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: disabling Intel PSN |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > > That's not true. It only decreases security if you make the manual > > part of the passphrase correspondingly shorter. As an *addition*, it > > increases security. As a *replacement*, it decreases security. > > Dangerous assumption. You now have known key plaintext.
Generating a kry from a passphrase should be *always* be done via cryptographic hash -- otherwise you have a hole big enough to drive a truck through your cryptosystems. Human-entered passphrases are *never* random.
> > Although I personally disagree with (c), if a company has a product I > > want I'd rather see them make it available on Linux with a dumb > > license rather than not offer it at all. > > Fortunately if you pick the right CPU's (eg the winchip) you can spoof > the CPUID 8)
I didn't say it made sense :)
-=hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |