Xref: utzoo comp.os.msdos.apps:225 sci.crypt:3376
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bu.edu!transfer!lectroid!cme
From: cme@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Word Perfect "locked document encryption" is trivial to break
Message-ID: <2152@lectroid.sw.stratus.com>
Date: 28 Aug 90 21:24:41 GMT
References: <12163@hoptoad.uucp> <1190@manta.NOSC.MIL>
Sender: usenet@lectroid.sw.stratus.com
Reply-To: cme@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Followup-To: comp.os.msdos.apps
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering.
Lines: 17

In article <1190@manta.NOSC.MIL> grantk@manta.nosc.mil.UUCP (Kelly J. Grant) writes:
>I disagree that WP documents are "trivial" to decode.  They are possibly
>trivial for the 'sci.crypt' people who have experience in breaking
>ciphers and the like, but for people who have no training or knowledge
>in the subject, I think WP locked documents are perfectly safe for 
>reports or other "private" (but not classified) documents.

	[ more of the same deleted ]

Kelly,

	I can't speak for the original posters, but I was offended by
WP's false claim.  I don't care about the security of the encryption
mechanism.  My mother has a china cabinet with an ornamental latch --
pretty and useless -- but the manufacturer didn't claim it was as good
as a steel safe.  WP made that bogus a claim -- and that was the
unforgivable sin.