[cryptography] @Eduardo

2014-01-06 Thread Roth Paxton
First off lets get the terminology correct. Nanites are not nano spies. I am only relating to you what I observed and offering the only possible explanation for what I saw. I saw evidence of micro inscription that could not possibly have been made by anything else. If I had realized at that

[cryptography] NSA Molecular Nanotechnology hardware trojan

2014-01-05 Thread Roth Paxton
I know that this is going to sound nearly impossible and I cannot fully explain how it works but after witnessing the evidence left behind by this technology I feel that it is necessary to inform the more intelligent out there of the reality of how the NSA is bridging the air gap on secure

[cryptography] H4-U16 cipher

2013-11-14 Thread Roth Paxton
Here is an explanation of a new cryptographic principle that I call a homomorphic linear set. Please peruse this page. http://s13.zetaboards.com/Crypto/topic/7122592/1/#new Paxton Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android ___ cryptography mailing list

[cryptography] New cipher modification

2013-11-10 Thread Roth Paxton
Please review the attached document. Any feedback would be appreciated. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android H4-U16.doc Description: MS-Word document ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net

[cryptography] New modification to cipher

2013-11-10 Thread Roth Paxton
H4-U16 Cryptographic Algorithm by Roth C. Paxton 10/21/2013   Abstract   The purpose of this paper is to describe a powerful new cryptographic algorithm that utilizes stacked blocks of data to encrypt and decrypt information. H4-U16 is an abstract  symmetric block cipher that relies on the

[cryptography] New cipher

2013-11-02 Thread Roth Paxton
Check out www.cryptographyuniversal.com Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

[cryptography] New cipher

2013-11-02 Thread Roth Paxton
Cryptographyuniversal.com is my website.@Niko. I accept your criticism and you are correct that I was angry at the IACR when the site was published. However I am only an amatuer cryptographer. Some of the math is wrong. The site is merely an exposition of a new type of cipher that is fairly