Re:Sorry, RSA, I'm just not buying it
by letstryagain on Monday December 23, 2013 @08:37PM
(#6957757)
It's pretty obvious that the 'client' was indeed the NSA. They say they can't reveal who the client is because of the NDA. If the client was NOT the NSA they could simply say so. But they didn't...
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Ahhh no. Your making assumptions. It's not obvious that the client was the NSA. Why not the DOD, or CIA, or hell even SSA?
Not that it matters much anyway. The result is the same.
That's not how NDAs work... usually would be a prohibition of both confirming AND/or denying anything related to the information behind the NDA.
Re:Sorry, RSA, I'm just not buying it
by maxerickson on Monday December 23, 2013 @09:13PM
(#6957862)
I don't think you can play 20 questions and also say that you are respecting the NDA.
Fips certifications cost some money and openssl relies upon sponsors to do that. As I understood their explanation it was one of the fips sponsors.
It had a bug anyways, nobody ever used dual ec with openssl.