Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?
From: Mxsmanic (mxsmanic_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 10/05/03
- Next message: Mike Scott: "Re: The system used by AC and friends"
- Previous message: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- In reply to: Dennis Knorr: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Next in thread: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: Paul Schlyter: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 02:38:34 +0200
Dennis Knorr writes:
> No! otherwise you could decode AES without a password.
The only difference I can see is that encryption keeps part of the
algorithm secret (namely, the key), whereas encoding keeps all of the
algorithm public.
ZIP compression is a form of encryption, but no part of the algorithm is
secret and the algorithm is not designed to maximize obfuscation, so it
isn't a very useful cipher.
-- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
- Next message: Mike Scott: "Re: The system used by AC and friends"
- Previous message: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- In reply to: Dennis Knorr: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Next in thread: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: Paul Schlyter: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|