Prev: Recommend AES Program, Please
Next: Spelling it Out.
From: adacrypt on 6 Jul 2010 11:47
I have already laboured the point that this cryptography uses the
concept of Mutual Databases and that it maps plaintext characters to
such widely dispersed points in space that makes it impossible to
invert the ciphertext by any mathematical algorithm albeit the means
of inverting the ciphertext is mathematical per se at the end of the
day. The cryptography uses well-known theorems in vector methodology
and less known private claims in scalable key cryptography.

In the scalable key cryptography also being expounded separately, it
uses privately devised methods in modular arithmetic that may raise an
eyebrow among mathematicians, this is in the scalable key cryptography
that is being expounded separately on http://www.scalarcryptography.co.uk
your attention and checking of this home grown mathematics is very
welcome.

By way of a broad general overview I would like to say that I am
pleased with the way that both cryptography inventions stands clear of
the other two very large and important other ingredients of this
crypto scheme. Let me explain, the way that I see it is that although
the cipher design cryptography is at the heart of any crypto scheme
there is a clear and definite end to its involvement in the operation
of the eventual overall scheme. Once it is established that the
ciphers are theoretically unbreakable then the scheme should go over
as quickly as possible to the more subjective business of software
engineering and the unending business of infrastructure management –
these are different experts altogether who should not need to know
anything about cryptography per se.

Although their work is hugely important in that it provides additional
tertiary security even that should be engineered out of the way so
that they can give full rein to what they are really good at – that is
the management of networks that may be small enough for a single
office administrator to do on his/her own or indeed a massive central
control station that uses computers to manage other computers so great
is the scope of some of the crypto schemes. In both of these extreme
cases it should be possible for these experts to proceed without any
knowledge of the core algorithm that under pins the scheme that they
are managing – its just none of their business.

The cryptography that is on the table either as vector cryptography or
scalable key cryptography operates on that premise and does just
that.

I envisage three areas of expertise that are enabled by the
successful realisation of a theoretically unbreakable cipher, firstly
there is the mathematician who is most likely to provide the ciphers
(a clear and finite end to his involvement however is essential),
there is the software engineer who may optimise the operation of the
software (a periodically subjective end to this) but way out on their
own is the never-ending business of the infrastructure management.
Crypto schemes should be operable by non-specialist managers that can
be recruited from any branch of management in the whole of industry
and commerce – that goes for their operatives also.

Weak cryptography can soak up such huge amounts of specialised
management that it makes this idealism a non-starter. I’m afraid that
is happening now even as you read this.

There is a download made available today from one of my two websites
called “A Compendium of 5 Ciphers Program Sourcecode” that will enable
the reader to test run the completed scalable key ciphers on your own
computers – please see http://www.scalarcryptography.co.uk - be my
guest and download it - adacrypt


From: Tom St Denis on 6 Jul 2010 21:20
On Jul 6, 11:47 am, adacrypt <austin.oby...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> I have already laboured the point that this cryptography uses the
> concept of Mutual Databases and that it maps plaintext characters to
> such widely dispersed points in space that makes it impossible to

I wonder from time to time, how batshit insane you have to be to
constantly post the same incomprehensible poorly argued points over
and over again.

Tom
From: Stewart Malik on 6 Jul 2010 22:44
On Jul 7, 10:20 am, Tom St Denis <t...(a)iahu.ca> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 11:47 am, adacrypt <austin.oby...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have already laboured the point that this cryptography uses the
> > concept of Mutual Databases and that it maps plaintext characters to
> > such widely dispersed points in space that makes it impossible to
>
> I wonder from time to time, how batshit insane you have to be to
> constantly post the same incomprehensible poorly argued points over
> and over again.
>
> Tom
I quite agree.

Adacrypt, why don't you put forward some decent points and then we may
actually take you seriously.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Recommend AES Program, Please
Next: Spelling it Out.