Re: My Open Letter.



On Oct 4, 5:10 am, Bruce Stephens <bruce+use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
adacrypt <austin.oby...@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

[...]

PM failed in a known plaintext attack - end of story - he is trying to
skate over that fact but the cryptography is still rock solid - the
mathematics don't lie - that can be demonstarted before any audience -
time alone will tell - hope you are well - adacrypt.

Why don't you cooperate and give Paulo what he asks for?

I think it's quite plausible that you have a system that (overall) is
roughly equivalent to a one-time-pad (though much less efficient, and
only until you start reusing your databases).

The (very mildly) interesting question is whether the vector stuff
actually adds anything (other than complexity and significant overhead).

For testing that, Paulo's test seems quite appropriate: if he can do
what he claims then your vector stuff is no better than just about
anything else (in particular XOR (as in the one-time-pad)) and is much
less efficient.

It is easy for any of you critics of adacrypt to get his software and
create the five files PM wants. It you put $6 in my Paypal account I
will do that simple task for you.

File # and content I can send you:

1 plaintext 1
2 ciphertext 1
3 plaintext 2
4 ciphertext 2
5 plaintext 3

I can do that simple work without any help from adacrypt in one hour.
Why do you not do the easy work to defeat adacrypt's steely bastion of
security? The hard work is breaking the code. The easy work is
preparing the 5 files.
.



Relevant Pages