Good morning, all.
Juanita, I think you've solved the problem. How can you be so brilliant so early in the morning? I was writing a reply to some of the posts which your reply has rendered moot (rendered MOOT?? what kinda tawk izzat?)
BBruin, I didn't even realize that laws existed limiting encryption levels. When I spoke to Chris yesterday, his point was that Jaws (and everyone else) was just trying to stay one step ahead of the 14 year old hacker, fromwhich I gathered that it isn't all that difficult to compromise the current 128 or 156 level. Seems like a Catch-22 doesn't it? "yes, you can have encryption technology, but it can't be unbreakable".
But, then again, no one has ever accused a gov't of excess logic.
dan oreilly, I was surprised by the price increase, too. I had a bid in at the (then) asking price of $1.00
and never got filled, either. These MMs are sinister characters, aren't they?
Markox5, I didn't ask Chris about the US laws, but I can certainly call him today and ask. You're right: we should be aware of anything that might affect our investment.
dan, about the cell phone encryption: it's my understanding that Jaws will be addressing the "industrial espionage" level whose users will gladly pay any price.
I'm trying to compress my responses because, since I have a trial membership (I got in under the wire) I have the "3 per day" limit. But I may cut my trial short and join early. This is just too much fun. |
