<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
Subject: Re: More than 128 Bit
From: Joachim Otahal <jou,AT,gmx,DOT,net>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 20:40:09 +0200
In-reply-to: <1055096024.4348.65.camel@monster.omnifarious.org>
References: <3EE3347A.70906@gmx.net> <20030608165904.GB655@dreamcraft.com.au> <1055096024.4348.65.camel@monster.omnifarious.org>

Eric M. Hopper wrote:
On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 11:59, Tomasz Ciolek wrote:
Of course, there is the problem of a limited number of blocks being able
to be encrypted with a key before you start leaking information.  But
CIPE handles that problem pretty well already by changing keys

Have fun (if at all possible),

Oh, I do. Cipe was the only program (that I know of now) which creates encrypted tunnel easily even over dynamic IP on (currently) 3 servers with different linux kernels at different places. I could connect them all that way to save quite some money. All other things I tried 'till then made me gave up sooner or later. My first iptables fight was a lot harder than making cipe work so nicely (for example).
Although the documentation isn't the best, you have the cipe-l archive which answered all questions I had.


<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]