Re: wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- From: "r.e.s." <r_e_s_01@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 16:38:55 -0700
"Sebastian Gottschalk" <seppi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote ...
r.e.s. wrote:
If a provider of encryption software doesn't provide the source code,
how do you know they or their friends won't have full access to whatever
you "encrypt" with it?
You're talking as if open source software would be much better wrt.
trust...
Yes, definitely. There can be a "trust factor" favoring software that
__I__ compile or interpret __myself__ using open source that's transparent
to __me__, and which has also been publically cryptanalysed by experts.
(Hint: We demand it to be Open Source to verify that it's implemented
correctly and free of common mistakes that would accidentally weaken the
system. Because experience told us that most vendors don't get it right
until they have to stand public scrunity.)
Hint: Did I suggest otherwise?
.
- References:
- wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- From: Arnold Friend
- Re: wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- From: r.e.s.
- wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- Prev by Date: Re: Need a "real-time" file authenticating scheme
- Next by Date: Re: wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- Previous by thread: Re: wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- Next by thread: Re: wanted opinions: Powercrypt 2000 (text encryption)
- Index(es):