ANN: obfuscate 0.2.2
in [Python]
|
From: Steven D'Aprano on 10 Apr 2010 10:35 I am pleased to announce the first stable release of obfuscate, version 0.2.2. http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/ obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text. This is a maintenance release of back-end and API changes but no new ciphers. This should be considered the first stable API for obfuscate. obfuscate includes the following ciphers: - rot13, rot5, rot18, rot47 - atbash - Caesar cipher - Keyword - Affine - Playfair, Playfair6, Playfair16 - frob (xor) - Vigenere - RailFence - plus others. DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not be used where high security is required. obfuscate is released under the MIT licence. Requires Python 2.5 or 2.6. -- Steven
From: Paul Rubin on 10 Apr 2010 16:34 Steven D'Aprano <steve(a)REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes: > DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not be > used where high security is required. Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple rot13 ;-).
From: Steven D'Aprano on 10 Apr 2010 21:17 On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote: > Steven D'Aprano <steve(a)REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes: >> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not >> be used where high security is required. > > Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high > security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple > rot13 ;-). Ha ha, that's funny! I've never heard that one before! *wink* I may add a quadruple-rot13 to the next release. Would you like credit? obfuscate does include ciphers which, prior to the invention of the computer, were good enough for real world use. E.g. the Playfair cipher was still in use for field communications in World War 2, e.g: http://practicalcryptography.com/ciphers/playfair-cipher/ and of course Vigenere is uncrackable if you provide it with a cryptographically random key as long as the message which you use only once. (In that case, it is a one-time-pad.) -- Steven
From: geremy condra on 10 Apr 2010 23:00 On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve(a)remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote: > >> Steven D'Aprano <steve(a)REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes: >>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not >>> be used where high security is required. >> >> Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high >> security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple >> rot13 ;-). > > Ha ha, that's funny! I've never heard that one before! *wink* I think I lost a sarcasm detector to this line- are you being serious? Geremy Condra
From: Steven D'Aprano on 10 Apr 2010 23:44
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 03:00:50 +0000, geremy condra wrote: > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano > <steve(a)remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote: >> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote: >> >>> Steven D'Aprano <steve(a)REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes: >>>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not >>>> be used where high security is required. >>> >>> Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high >>> security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple >>> rot13 ;-). >> >> Ha ha, that's funny! I've never heard that one before! *wink* > > I think I lost a sarcasm detector to this line- are you being serious? Possibly I overloaded your sarcasm detector and broke it. No, I'm not serious. If I had a dollar for every time somebody suggested using rot13 twice for extra security, I could buy out Microsoft. Hell, if I had a dollar for every time *I* suggested using rot13 twice, I could buy out Google. -- Steven |