Re: Tristrata - worth another look?

Alex Alten (Alten@Home.Com)
Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:49:47 -0800

• Previous message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Tristrata - worth another look?"
• In reply to: Thomas Roessler: "Tristrata - worth another look?"

As a founding employee of TriStrata I want to apologize to the
crypto community for that "unbreakable" crap. As far as I can tell
none of us here ever made that statement, but somehow we got tarred
with it. If you handle the fundamentals correctly, a Vernam cipher
is a useful tool in the crypto bag, with its good and bad attributes.
RC4 is an example of one type. RKS is just another type.

- Alex

At 03:24 PM 3/31/99 +0200, you wrote:
>Apparently, Tristrata are trying to get away from the "our encryption is
>unbreakable, errm, perhaps not" company: They are advertising that they've
>licensed RSA's BSAFE, and on their web pages, the "Random Key Stream"
>(remember?) appears as yet another symmetric cipher, among Blowfish, Cast5,
>RC4, 3DES. No more "one time pad" buzz.
>
>Under http://209.31.36.243/products/prod_descrip.pdf (dont' ask me why they
>don't have decent URLs), there is a new white paper detailing their current
>architecture.
>
>Just FYI, tlr
>

--
Alex Alten
Alten@Home.Com
Alten@TriStrata.Com
P.O. Box 11406
Pleasanton, CA  94588  USA
(925) 417-0159

• Previous message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Tristrata - worth another look?"
• In reply to: Thomas Roessler: "Tristrata - worth another look?"