[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neal H. Walfield) writes: > > If our only alternatives are > > > > 1) no ssh > > 2) ssh with no security > > Wrong, which just proves that you have not read this thread: we are > arguing about entropy; ssh is only a side argument.
*IF*. Can you read the word *IF*? The proposition was advanced that no security is better than bad security. I disagree with *that* proposition, specifically.
