RE: Steganography

From: Harvey Newstrom (
Date: Sat Sep 29 2001 - 11:35:36 MDT

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"!

I work in the security field. I understand and support steganography and
encryption. But be realistic, people. They will not remain hidden
"forever". They will not remain uncrackable "forever".

Harvey Newstrom <>
Principal Security Consultant, Newstaff Inc. <>
Board of Directors, Extropy Institute <>
Cofounder, Pro-Act <>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:59 MDT