Re: gnupg security flaw march 3rd

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 01:33:52PM -0700, Piet van Weel wrote:
> Here let me translate that for you...
> Obviously your compression algorythm didn't decrypt properly...
"Compression algorythms" don't "decrypt"; those would be "cryptographic
algorithms", with an 'i'.

Also, based on sheer bitcount, there's no way that whole message fit
into that block of random text. That's a screwup on the sender's side,
not the receiver's.

Besides, if Mutt can't work it out (and it couldn't), it must be wrong.
;-)

    --Mac

-- 
Julian "Mac" Mason                            mac@cs.hmc.edu
Computer Science '06                          (310)-882-8068
Harvey Mudd College
-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (SunOS)
iD8DBQFEMY1H1AphoTGXiN0RAqqrAJ9FOBG882jixwXUyr36J3FQ/NCQewCbBtC/
YQP4xpMxneDd4G/x+teRcgw=
=NNyY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.