Trillian Secure IM

Alex Pankratov ap at
Mon Oct 8 12:17:48 EDT 2007


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcos el Ruptor [mailto:ruptor at] 
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 6:21 AM
> To: Alex Pankratov
> Cc: cryptography at
> Subject: Re: Trillian Secure IM
> I found those threads:
> As you can see from the last post in the second thread, ultimately  
> they agreed that 128-bit DH is secure and that I am just some crazy  
> guy trying to scare them.

Yickes. Ignorance is a bliss. 

I am actually curious to see what was the DH modulus size in 
T's versions that were blocked by AOL. Given T's installation
base, strong SecureIM would've dramatically complicated "lawful 
intercepts", which AOL is probably required to implement.


The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at

More information about the cryptography mailing list