Re: This Improvisation Will Buy Time Alright But….



On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:52:47 -0800 (PST)
WTShaw <lurens1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 10, 9:06 am, tom st denis <t...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 10, 8:29 am, adacrypt <austin.oby...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Many thanks to every body who has subscribed to my new
understanding of what is going on in the real world of cryptology.

Understanding is perhaps the wrong word here.  Maybe "complete and
utter confusion" or "hysteria" fit better.

Your problem is you know jack-f'ing squat about computer science,
technology, and least of all cryptography.  You're claiming to try
to interpret things through some view that isn't at all how reality
works.

We're not using "control codes of ASCII" because they're NOT ASCII
MESSAGES.  If I use all 8 bits of a byte to store an MP3 audio file,
I'm not passing that through some "ascii" filter to store the data.
It's just bytes in a file somewhere.

But you go on "learning" things.

Tom

But, you can use some of those other codes for custom purposes since
text inspection might not reveal them to the casual viewer.

That depends on your definition of "casual." You can give me some text
with interspersed control codes, and when I "casually" inspect it with
emacs, I will see lots of unexpected things.

In any case, why are we limiting ourselves to defending against casual
inspection? If we can defend against a not-casual inspection, then we
will certainly defend against a casual inspection as well. Are there
many real-world situations where you only want to defend against a
casual inspection?

-- Ben



--
Benjamin R Kreuter
UVA Computer Science
brk7bx@xxxxxxxxxxxx

--

"If large numbers of people are interested in freedom of speech, there
will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it; if public
opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even
if laws exist to protect them." - George Orwell

.