Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: net.crypt
Subject: Re: What is it really like?
Message-ID: <6650@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 4-May-86 00:36:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.6650
Posted: Sun May  4 00:36:27 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 4-May-86 00:36:27 EDT
References: <3264@reed.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 29

> The intention of my original posting was to ask what is *actually* done
> in the *real* world right *now*.  How do Nigeria or Chile or Lower
> Slabovia protect their diplomatic communications?...

The smarter ones probably go to one of the companies that specializes in
such things.  (Nor is it just the smaller countries; the US used Hagelin
cipher machines for some purposes in WW2, for example.)  Of course, they
have to wonder whether they can trust the company.

Alternatively, if you're friends with one of the superpowers, you can
ask them to help you out in the same way.  Once again, you'll never be
too sure whether your messages are secret from your big buddy.

Actually, for *diplomatic* messages there is nothing much wrong with the
one-time pad, or mechanized forms of it.  Diplomatic pouches are a fairly
secure and convenient way of shipping paper tape or whatever for key
distribution.  And the volume isn't high enough to cause really severe
key-volume problems.  Where one needs skilled help is for things like
military field communications, where one-time pads are impractical.

> How about the Soviets?

They almost certainly use one-time encryption for diplomatic stuff.  They
have a long history of being fond of one-time pads for spies, despite the
dangerous nuisance of keeping substantial volumes of key around.  What they
use for military operations, I don't know.
-- 
Join STRAW: the Society To	Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
Revile Ada Wholeheartedly	{allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry