Re: Explanation of my annoying bullish behaviour -

On Apr 26, 6:49 am, Bryan Olson <fakeaddr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
AdaCrypt wrote:

[...]

First of all, I am convinced that scalar data is so innately
transparent that it is totally unsuitable for cryptography.

Where's your cryptanalysis? If scalar data is so transparent,
why are you unable to see through it?

I believe [...] I am strongly of the belief [...] I believe
[...] I think

It's not about what you or I believe. You've shown no math, no
science, to justify any of it.



I am not a cryptographer but I wrote a cipher way back in 1997
[...]
I have had some very bad treatment by the establishment and frankly I
have a very low opinion of the academies and associations and the
[...]
I have written politely and telephoned many individuals only to get no
answer. Some big name academies here in the UK lost my stuff and said

How would you expect a college of neurology to react if you wrote
to them about bold new methods you imagined for brain surgery?

Here on sci.crypt, you got useful responses. First you need to work
on writing text that clearly means something. Proving deep results
is hard, but the bar here is not that high. If you detect a lack of
patience, remember we have seen many, many people claim to establish
deep results while demonstrating the inability to state simple ones.

[...]

This is why I am deliberately labouring the promotional aspect

If you want *any* credibility, you must address your statement
(pointed out by Joe Ashwood):

The cipher is industry accredited as being theoretically
unbreakable, the only cipher-type to be accorded that
distinction.
http://www.cryptorati.com/scalar.html

The way this appears on your web site, the most straightforward
reading is that "the cipher" means your cipher, and under that
reading the claim is an outright lie. Possibly, "the cipher"
could refer to the one-time pad, in which case the claim is
correct. Your web site's current presentation cannot stand.

--
--Bryan

I beg your pardon Bryan. the statement relates to the genuine one-time
pad invented by Major Joseph Mauborgne of the US Arrny. - I would not
make an unqualified claim like that on my own - sorry for the
misunderstanding - adacrypt

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Explanation of my annoying bullish behaviour -
    ... transparent that it is totally unsuitable for cryptography. ... The cipher is industry accredited as being theoretically ... could refer to the one-time pad, in which case the claim is ... make an unqualified claim like that on my own - sorry for the ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Explanation of my annoying bullish behaviour -
    ... transparent that it is totally unsuitable for cryptography. ... The cipher is industry accredited as being theoretically ... could refer to the one-time pad, in which case the claim is ... make an unqualified claim like that on my own - sorry for the ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: XOR without repeated key
    ... >>have said about Robert's cipher ain't necessarily so. ... > previous to any of your claims that it isn't an OTP, can be cracked, ... the original post is relevant. ... This cipher could be something other than a one-time pad. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Chosen Ciphertext Attack Prevention
    ... > I'm a total newbie to this area, but am reading as much as I can. ... > I've been reading about known plaintext attacks and how they are not much of ... > symmetric cipher (I suppose it's not absolutely necessary to use a symmetric ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: XOR without repeated key
    ... Tim made an "if the key is random" comment. ... nothing about re-used keys. ... He jumps to the conclusion that Robert's cipher ... theoretical one-time pad. ...
    (sci.crypt)