[Full-disclosure] selling office 2003 & 2007 0day

[James Matthews]

If he got a dollar every time someone says he has 0-days to sell we would be
bossing bill gates around (as if we aren't now =)! )

On 7/17/07, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:12:04 +0200, Pieter de Boer said:
>
> > Ohwell, signing with public keys is pointless anyhow.. *whistles
> innocently*
>
> Signing it with the *recipient's* public key can be somewhat interesting,
> as
> it results in a signature that only the recipient can identify - if
> anybody
> else tries to verify it, they can't, which results in a
> mostly-repudiatable
> signature.
>
> Of course, the *usual* use case is to either:
>
> *encrypt* with the recipients public key (so only their private key can
> decrypt
> it), and then sign the whole thing with your private key (so they can
> verify
> you did it by using your public key).  This results in something that
> anybody
> can verify you sent, but only the recipient can read.  or...
>
> Sign with your private key, then encrypt with their public key - at that
> point
> only the recipient can decode it.  In addition, only the recipient can see
> the
> (now-decoded) signature and verify it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
>


-- 
http://www.goldwatches.com/watches.asp?Brand=14
http://www.jewelerslounge.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20070717/c75e6f03/attachment.html