Talk:Daniel J. Bernstein

message: Apart from edit history relative to the obscurity of the topic, is there a reason why this article is marked NPOV? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tqbf (talk • contribs) 
:Seems reasonably NPOV to me -- tag removed. Neilc 06:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPV 

message: Someone would care to relate these 3?
As djb forbids qmail binary releases, either with or without patches, for security reasons, it doesn't seam to me that OS vendors are willing to distribute the qmail sources along with their OS distros. Can someone get some official info on this, with references in this page? --Netshark 02:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qmail, the Os distros and the license model 

message: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.djbdns/13864
This seems like it's the first time in quite a while that DJB has acknowledged a bug in DJBDNS 9and paid his promised reward). How should this be integrated into the article? The DJBDNS article probably needs some alterations too. XenonofArcticus (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  DJBDNS security guarantee bounty paid 

message: Would this  be an adequate source placing djb at Bellport High? I don't work on Bio pages much, so wasn't sure what would be required.  I attended classes with him there, but I'm assuming that comes under WP:OR. Dstumme (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for Bellport High 

message: Wasn't djb the first one to popularise the idea of SYN Cookies? - http://cr.yp.to/syncookies.html
87.112.66.37 (talk) 23:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SYN Cookies 

message: The article had this sentence in it: "Bernstein offers a security guarantee for qmail and djbdns [...] no functioning exploits of any of these programs have been published".  Not true, as shown by these sources:
* DJB himself admitted that the Dempsky bug was a security problem with djbdns ref Indeed, this is part of the next sentence in the article.
* There is an issue where people have been able to spoof the dnscache part of djbdns ref
The "no functioning exploits" line was never backed up by a reference, and I have just posted two references showing that djbdns has had security issues that have been exploited.  Is there any reason why this article should still have the "no functioning exploits" line?  I have revised the line to state that no functioning exploits have been found for qmail.  This, in spite of the fact that qmail has the backscatter spam problem, which can very well be considered to be an exploit. 
 
Disclaimer: I am the author of MaraDNS.  Samboy (talk) 14:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No functioning exploits.  Really? 

message: "...perhaps current views about how large numbers have to be before they are impractical to factor might be off by a factor of three. Thus as 512-digit RSA was then breakable, then perhaps 1536-bit RSA would be too."
If it's off by a factor of 3, then it would be 514 bit RSA that might be breakable, not 1536. If the intended meaning is that triple the number of bits of encryption could be broken, then it is off by a power of 3, not a factor of 3. Either way, the current wording is wrong. Aleph Infinity (talk) 17:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prime number factorization 

message: Really now, how nice it would be if the article stated whether the court's ruling was *for* Bernstein or *against*. If it is "implied" that the ruling was in favor (or against?), well, implied is just not good enough. Toddcs (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bernstein v. United States 

message: There is a note on the article about the lead section, but there does not seem to be a discussion...
I would like to make clear that Bernstein took on the security industry by writing a number of core applications with minimal bugs that functioned for years with out any known exploits.  Thus raising the standard.  He was vocal and controversial in his criticism of the status quo which resulted in blow back.  The result was that his software was refused distribution by most linux distros whilst relying on it internally and even projects like OpenBSD over his advocacy for licence free software.
RonaldDuncan (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You are of course welcome to add this or other notable info to the lede (in brief/summary form), with details in the body of the article - as long as the material is appropriately referenced (in the body) to reliable sources. Anastrophe (talk) 18:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: Discussion concluded, here is the archive link in case it comes up again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive316#Daniel_J._Bernstein 
73.89.25.252 (talk) 01:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive of BLPN discussion on Bernstein re Appelbaum