in reply to CipherTextI
Here are my objections to this post.
- This isn't valid Perl. It won't run.
- Even if it was, you are failing to achieve the basic level of encryption taken for granted decades ago. This is an improvement on the xor nonsense that you had previously. But it isn't much of an improvement.
- The fact that you are trying to get a patent is but another reason to avoid this. It is possible that you might get a patent. But that is IMO due to how broken the patent system is, and not to the merits of your case.
- A basic rule in cryptography is to never trust the crypanalysis of the author of the code. This applies when the author is widely recognized as a competent researcher. It applies doubly when the author is an amateur.
- There are widely available free alternatives which are much more trustworthy. For instance RSA is no longer encumbered by a patent, has been analyzed intensely, and can be used for the application that you mention by the simple expedient of putting your website on an https server. That takes care of the details on the server's end, and the browser will do the rest.
- You still have not realized that your prototypes are completely being ignored? We went through this before and I know you didn't believe us then, but it is true. You would be better off just removing them all because they are not used on method calls.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re (tilly) 1: CipherTextI
by merlyn (Sage) on Jul 17, 2001 at 21:19 UTC | |
by Hofmator (Curate) on Jul 17, 2001 at 21:40 UTC | |
by lzcd (Pilgrim) on Feb 25, 2002 at 02:40 UTC |
In Section
Code Catacombs