Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> Samantha Atkins wrote,
> > Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> > > OK. I exaggerate. Rather than "nothing is uncrackable", I
> > should have said
> > > "99% of the freebie downloadable software in use today run by
> > clueless users
> > > who just use the default settings and have no patience for
> > time-consuming
> > > complicated mathematics is probably crackable by a really determined
> > > attacker today."
> >
> > You would still be wrong. The complicated math is in the program.
>
> You misunderstand me. I didn't mean that the user had to manually perform
> the calculations. I meant that they have to sit through a delay every time
> they send or receive encryption. Because of this, 99% of PGP users choose
> the smallest key that the program will allow. They deliberately choose the
> weakest possible security because they are impatient.
>
> > You can hide messages that will never ever be cracked.
>
> There's that phrase again: "messages that will never be cracked"!
>
>
Please tell me how a message encoded with a one-time pad that is
never recovered can be cracked. Also, the large part of my
reply was that many means that are not that onerous produce
results that cannot be "pragmatically" cracked - cannot be
cracked in time to make any real difference.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:59 MDT