From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jun 19 13:43:20 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA10085 for current-outgoing; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 13:43:20 -0700 Received: from grunt.grondar.za (grunt.grondar.za [196.7.18.129]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA10070 ; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 13:43:02 -0700 Received: from grumble.grondar.za (grumble.grondar.za [196.7.18.130]) by grunt.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA00173; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 22:42:40 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumble.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA00321; Mon, 19 Jun 1995 22:42:39 +0200 Message-Id: <199506192042.WAA00321@grumble.grondar.za> X-Authentication-Warning: grumble.grondar.za: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Crypto code - an architectural proposal. Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 22:42:39 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > If the state department has a problem (or potential problem) with the > > crypt(3) in libdescrypt, why is there _no_ problem with the MD5 crypt(3)? > > They are functionally equivalent. Was the MD5 version even vetted? > > MD5 cannot decrypt. I thought that was the point of crypt(3). "One-way trapdoor algorithm"? M -- Mark Murray 46 Harvey Rd, Claremont, Cape Town 7700, South Africa +27 21 61-3768 GMT+0200