[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: VMs: Re: "Running code" -- I hope not...
Speaking for myself, I recognize high level of professional scrutiny under
which the VMS has been examined. Friedman and his group of experts, for
example, would have been well versed in cryptographic techniques. I am only
referring to the running code proposal and am suggesting that it would have
most likely been detected if present. I am in no way saying the the
"professionals" would have known or examined all approaches, nor would I
discourage anyone's suggestions concerning encryption. Friedman suggested an
artificial language, but that is as far as he got (his group did a
considerable amount of work). All ideas are welcome and all ideas help us to
gain further insight. I encourage everyone to continue their efforts.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: VMs: Re: "Running code" -- I hope not...
> Zitat von DANA SCOTT <dscott520@xxxxxxx>:
> > Those of us who are not cryptologists probably rely on this type of
> > anlysis
> > to the experts. Friedman, Manly, and Tiltman as well as others in the
> > know
> > who have examined the VMS would probably have detected this in a flash.
> > Regards,
> > Dana Scott
> What exactly are you implying? That it's pointless to try and solve this
> problem as an amateur?
> I feel with the VM we are in a dilemma, since for all we know, the
> scheme can't be that terribly complicated. OTOH, all the simple schemes we
> tried seem to fail.
> I hadn't heard about the running code being tested before, so I thought it
> might be worthwhile to try it and present results, even if they're
> debitel.net Webmail
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: