Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:18:51 ADT
Attila T. Hun (attila@primenet.com)
Mon, 22 Jun 1998 21:22:46 +0000 (GMT)
On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Matt Blaze wrote:
> It is not hard to construct a contest in no one is likely to claim the
> reward for even though the underlying algorithm would be considered
> weak by modern standards. Many ciphers, especially those designed by
> amateurs, involve layer after layer of complex, obscure bit-twiddling
> that contributes nothing toward security except to make the initial
> analysis tedious and intellectually unrewarding.
>
per previous mail, I went around with the folks (might as well
be "kind", today) over a year ago. nothing fazed 'em or their
excuses. personally, not only do they not have anything, but
they are running a con-game to try to collect as many $100
fools who will be disqualified on a technicality anyway.
and, the "unbreakable" crypt is probably the output of a
white noise generator --after all, who's going to prove them
wrong?
> [snip]
> The cryptologic community has more than enough to do in evaluating
> serious proposals - the AES submissions alone should keep us all busy
> for many years to come. Why waste should we waste our time on, and
> give undeserved credibility to, crackpot challenges when there's so
> much interesting work to do right now?
>
amen!
good article; glad to see you weigh in against the lightweight cons.
attila out!
__________________________________________________________________________
go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say:
yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off.
_________________________________________________________________ attila__
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:18:51 ADT