Re: Cryptology Arguments - adacrypt

On Jun 30, 8:56 pm, Bruce Stephens <bruce+use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Stefan Tillich <stefa...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

[...]

It is astounding that you have - concerning those posts of you I did
read - so far shown great resistance against any objective discussion
of your ideas. Quite the contrary, you have gone on trying to discard
the whole bulk of cryptologic research up to this point as inferior to
your "vector cryptography". So even if this paper shows these
weaknesses in AES the way you want them to be (which seems very
doubtful with the cryptological knowledge you have shown so far), it
is funny to see you immediately trusting this scientific work, when
you go around and ditch all the rest.

<http://eprint.iacr.org/2007/248>, I guess.

Hi Bruce - me again,

Can I make it clear that I have no pretentions to knowing anything of
cryptology - whatever little I do know is what has rubbed off in
collisions . I don't need to know much general cryptology - most of
that is part of the unfortunate fallout in modern cryptology that I am
saying is wrong anyway so why study it any further. I declare that in
principle it is redundant and I don't need it. I only need enough to
defend myself and my theories with.

You see its like this - I was introduced to cryptography by a
cryptographer/mathematician who saw possibilities in my other work and
this resulted in my deciding to write my cipher. My cryptology as
such is all to do with testing my own work only - I am not interested
in general cryptology of other work in the status quo . My attitude is
that If I am successful I will make all that redundant. I don't teach
or work in cryptology so I only have to know enough to prepare my own
defence.

Mark you, I have known from the outset that selling the idea of a
wrong choice of encryption data as a mistake and that my cryptography
is the alternative to that mistake would be a mountain to climb.

I have so much value on my cipher that 1) I taught myself a
programming language for the sole purpose of writng the software and
2) I wrote over 100 working ciphers and thoroughly tested these just
to prove that this was no pipe dream before going public to Sci crypt.

The mathematics of my vector cryptography is so compelling in the
obvious strength of the ciphers that I am just waiting for it to be
recognised. There is no ego, fame or fortune in it for me just the
job satisfaction.- Austin O' Byrne

PS
This discussion here has got a bit misdirected - it is largely in
retaliation to DE's ridiculous challenges earlier.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Evaluation of MegaSnakeOil by "expert"
    ... > If he had claimed experience in cryptology, ... The security of an ideal cipher ... will crack the cipher. ... essence of the cipher's security. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Challenge. Break This
    ... > I have been reading about cryptology and made up a quick cipher. ... Alan C this post ends with w ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Challenge. Break This
    ... > I have been reading about cryptology and made up a quick cipher. ... Benjamin Choi ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Challenge. Break This
    ... > I have been reading about cryptology and made up a quick cipher. ... Tom ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • The Simplicity of it - Adacrypt
    ... In the broadest general terms I think that using scalar numbers as the ... instead of being recognised as a mistake. ... AES ciphertext that some cryptanalyst has found - congratulations to ... cryptology. ...
    (sci.crypt)