Tinc's response to "Linux's answer to MS-PPTP"

[Guus Sliepen]

Hello Peter Gutmann and others,

Because of its appearance on this mailing list and the Slashdot posting
about "Linux's answer to MS-PPTP", and in the tinc users' interest, we
have created a section about the current security issues in tinc, which
currently contains a response to Peter Gutmann's writeup:

http://tinc.nl.linux.org/security

I want to emphasize for the cryptography community here that certain
tradeoffs have been made between security and efficiency in tinc. So
please read the response as "why we think we need to do/used to do it
this way" instead of "why we think tinc is still as secure as anything
else". Comments are welcome. 

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
    Guus Sliepen <guus at sliepen.eu.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20030926/d2477159/attachment.pgp>