Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again

From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de)
Date: 09/19/03 

Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:09:20 +0200

Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> Mok-Kong Shen writes:
>
> > Please say in clear words how much do you
> > 'really' know about that software!
>
> Very little. Only what I gleaned from glancing over the Web page and
> from reading posts here.

Fine. But you seem nonetheless extremely enthusiatic
about the merits of that particular software (which
you 'know' very little, as you said), don't you?

>
> > Once again you seemed to be rather eager to answer a
> > number of other posts that apparently were easier to
> > tackle but ignored (at least sofar delayed to address)
> > my previous post.
>
> Your posts mostly ask questions about me, rather than discuss the topic
> at hand. I prefer only to discuss the topic at hand.

The main issues I raised were about AES and 3-DES. Were
these then (equivalent to) about you?? AES and 3-DES
seemed though very much remote from you (your thinking)
than VME, as far as one could see from your writing in
the thread, and that rather clearly.

>
> > I like to repeat my essential doubt about the soundness
> > (integrity/honesty etc.) of the marketing tactics
> > of the VME firm, pending resolution of issue indicated
> > above.
>
> You're entitled to your opinion. From the little bit I've seen of
> Meganet's product, I can't say that I have any interest in acquiring it
> at all, but I realize that others may feel differently. As long as I'm
> not forced to use their product to protect my privacy, I really don't
> care.

Then it is rational to think that proprietary (secret)
algorithms have the inherent risk of insecurity, i.e.
a higher apriori probability (not necessity!) of weakness
than ones that are publically better scrutinized. This
is not much different than e.g. one's taking medicaments
that have passed the examination of authorities and not
ones that come from the hands of certain aboriginal
'doctors' somewhere in Africa, even though one has no
(practical) means to exclude the possibility that these
could be better or even eventually lead to wonders.
Anyway, it is an exceedingly good rule of thumb of
everyday life that any stuff that is unclear/dubious
could well have something underneath it that is
undesirable/disadvantageous/dangerous. That's
why I repeatedly pointed out the evidently bizzare
fact that the self-touted VME software 'contains'
AES and 3-DES, which VME were apparently designed
to substitute/replace.

M. K. Shen
--------------------------------------------------------

Was sich ueberhaupt sagen laesst, | What can be said at all can
laesst sich klar sagen; und wovon | be said clearly; and
man nicht reden kann, darueber | whereof one cannot speak
muss man schweigen. | thereof one must be silent.
                                  |
    Ludwig Wittgenstein | (Translation of C. K.
    (1889 - 1951) | Ogden and F. Ramsey)

Relevant Pages

  • Re: THE MEGANET CHALLANGE
    ... > It's Meganet's job to prove that the VME algorithm is secure. ... 'contains' AES and 3-DES! ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again
    ... David Wagner wrote: ... Is VME certifed yes or no there site seems to ... contains AES and 3-DES. ... got FIPS certificates. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Virtual Matrix Encryption
    ... > environment or TOP SECRET plaintext in a CONFIDENTIAL environment). ... I am not sure for 100% about VME or any other snake-oil. ... already break AES, maybe they have already break VME, maybe VME is strong ... will break VME easier then AES. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again
    ... to be pure crap. ... Will VME? ... Well AES scales well. ... My point was "VME is crap" is an opinion not emotion. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Statement from Golden Ears
    ... There was no selectively edited article posting on my part. ... its not my job to validate or invalidate the AES. ... Perhaps I should just ignore your aberrant posts and self serving, ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)