Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask
 
PerlMonks  

Re^9: What happened to perlcc?

by daveola (Acolyte)
on Mar 01, 2011 at 11:40 UTC ( #890730=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^8: What happened to perlcc?
in thread What happened to perlcc?

    It's encoding, not encryption or obfuscation.
You are in disagreement with the rest of the world with the definition of "encryption".

  1. Encryption does NOT require a secret. Look up ROT13 on wikipedia
  2. My weak encryption does have a secret if you use choose to hide the key properly in the source. That's up to you.

I suggest, for your perusal:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encryption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rot13
http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=890723

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: What happened to perlcc?
by ikegami (Pope) on Mar 01, 2011 at 16:30 UTC

    Encryption does NOT require a secret.

    Again? You really should start reading the material to which you reference before contradicting.

    to make it unreadable to anyone except those possessing special knowledge

    To consider ROT13 and perlc to be forms of encryption, one must consider the algorithm itself to be the secret. First rule of encryption: Never consider the algorithm a secret.

    But enough theory. In practice, perlc provides the original intact without knowing either the algorithm or the salt you call "key". Objections over names don't really matter.

        To consider ROT13 and perlc to be forms of encryption,

      To consider ROT13 to be encryption, you have to know the definition of encryption. You choose to ignore it. I can't help you with that.

      I'm sure I'll get more negative reputation for this - someone should probably go to Wikipedia (and every other technical source on the subject) and let them know that Ikegami has redefined encryption and ROT13 no longer counts.

      Furthermore, I don't think we agree on the word intact:

      http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intact

      The code is not intact, it is transformed by the key. Whether or not you want to admit that "weak encryption" exists is up to you, but the code is not intact in the executable.

      This is the most ridiculous conversation I've had on the net, and that's saying a lot.

        By encrypting, I mean to make unreadable to anyone except those possessing special knowledge. Looks like there's no need to let Wikipedia know.

        By intact, I mean byte-for-byte equal. If the proginal program was «print("Hello World\n");», one gets back «print("Hello World\n");». What do you think it means?

        By encrypting, I mean to make unreadable to anyone except those possessing special knowledge. Looks like there's no need to let Wikipedia know.

        By intact, I mean byte-for-byte equal. If the original program was «print("Hello World\n");», one gets back «print("Hello World\n");». What do you think it means?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://890730]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (4)
As of 2020-03-29 10:08 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    To "Disagree to disagree" means to:









    Results (169 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?