Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- From: me@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:04:07 +0000
biject wrote:
I think it you did cipbhersaber on a computer and used
3 different keys. changing them frequently and doing
a BWTS like transform after stage one and stage two it
would be a much harder cipher to break.
If you want simple yet pretty safe (nobody has ever decrypted
a message encrypted with Ciphersaber-2 without guessing the
key), then Ciphersaber-2 is just right as it is. If you want
something that is much, much harder to break, modifying and
complicating Ciphersaber-2 is the wrong way to get there.
The right way is to simply switch to AES or PGP. AES isn't
as simple as Ciphersaber-2 but it is quite simple. PGP is
a lot more complex, but it solves many problems with key
distribution. All three have been examined by many experts,
which is a huge advantage over something you invent yourself
or create by modifying an existing cipher.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- From: xxein
- Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- References:
- THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- From: biject
- Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- From: biject
- THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- Prev by Date: Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- Next by Date: Re: utility for building arbitrary PKCS #7 content structure? e.g. openssl
- Previous by thread: Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- Next by thread: Re: THE SIMPLIEST SAFE CIPHER
- Index(es):
Loading