Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 09:50:12 -0500 From: Stephen Hilton <nospam@hiltonbsd.com> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ack! SYSTEMTYPE=WIN32 Message-ID: <20031001095012.7898752e.nospam@hiltonbsd.com> In-Reply-To: <3F7ABB8A.3050408@potentialtech.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0309301845560.40930-100000@s1.stradamotorsports.com> <3F7ABB8A.3050408@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 07:33:30 -0400 Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote: > Jason C. Wells wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Bill Moran wrote: > > > > > >>Are you serious? ROT_13 isn't encryption, it's a Caption Amazing > >>Decoder Ring. > > > > What's wrong with ROT_13? Is there a sploit for it? > > I think it was born 'sploited. > > > I figure if the guys at MIT allow it, it must be just fine. That Sam > > Hartman is a sharp guy. Why do you ask? > > Is this the same ROT_13 that Netscape mail used to use? ... that I > (seriously) had a Spiderman decoder ring for when I was a kid? Am > I getting it confused with something else? > Bill, I am just guessing about Jasons methods, but here goes. The authentication _is_ secure for telnet using kerberos, then he encrypts the telnet session with the decoder ring ROT_13 because the data flowing through the connection is not that sensitive, just the login credentials are felt by the OP to need a real level of encryption. My 2 cents, Stephen Hilton nospam@hiltonbsd.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031001095012.7898752e.nospam>