reynt0 wrote: > Wouldn't the claim be: "cannot listen in on such a > transaction between Alice and Bob without affecting the > transaction in a detectable way"?
Depends on how pedantic you want to be, and how you define 'transaction'. Frankly, if I were to have proof of an eavesdropper, I would consider the transaction to be compromised and I'd scrub it. Hence, QM makes it possible to have a key transaction between Alice and Bob guaranteed to be free of eavesdroppers. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
