Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : JAWS Technologies - NASDAQ (NM):JAWZ -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: justaninvestor who wrote (941)	9/21/1998 5:51:00 PM
From: Enam Luf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3086

BB, I am not an expert either, but I have done enough reading to understand, at least conceptually, what "strong" encryption means and where the shortcomings lie: Read through the following on encryption techniques to gain a better understanding of the problems I am referring to: counterpane.com there is a whole bunch of great stuff on that website that you should read as well... The thing that bugs me is JAWZ's, use of the word "unbreakable." When I look at the list in your last post and see a word like pseudorandom, that, to me, implies a weakness, as most "strong" encryption hardware products (to the best of my knowledge) rely on true hardware random number generators. In addition, it would appear that the original key length is not actually that long, but is seeded by a much smaller value given by the user and then expanded to a larger bit length... I don't know enough to know if this adds security or detracts from security... or how it is implemented in JAWZ's solution. I am not familiar with the expert you quote. Actually, the only two sources I trust at this point because I have researched them are Bruce Schneier (see above link at counterpane) and Peter Guttman's page @ aukland that someone posted earlier. I am not aware of any study done by either on L5, and would feel much more comfortable If I knew their feelings on the matter. JAWZ's solution may very well be as good as they say, but, IMO, there are too many people making claims like that, and I would like to see confirmation from one of the sources above. Perhaps you should email them for their opinions..... Enam

To: justaninvestor who wrote (941)	9/21/1998 6:00:00 PM
From: caly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3086

Barrie, SNC Lavalin looks like a big engineering, construction and manufacturing firm to me (http://www.snc-lavalin.com/snc/index.html), And Kilborn looks to be a mining and metallurgy company (http://www.cdn-news.com/DATABASE/ARCHIVE/1996/1/15/SNC0115.html). Have they considered having renowned security professionals analyze it? Someone like Bruce Schneier at counterpane.com or Paul Kocher at cryptography.com? The latter outfit was responsible for cracking DES in 56 hours. I would think that endorsements from people like these would carry much more weight.