I must admit I'm baffled, and rather appalled, to be seeing supposed advocates of cryptography suggesting, in effect, that cryptologic education somehow perpetuates a guild system or that deployed security protocols need not be measured against the current state of the art.
It might be debatable whether only licensed electricians should design and install electrical systems. But hardly anyone would argue that electrical system designers and installers needn't be competent at what they do. (Perhaps most of those who would advance such arguments were electrocuted or killed in fires before they had a chance to make their case). The sad fact is that if one wants to be taken seriously as cryptographer, one needs to learn cryptology. The good news is that there are few, if any, artificial barriers to doing so. Those of us who seek to increase the pool of talent and see more widely deployed cryptography can best do so by making the subject accessible to newcomers and those in related fields. We do everyone a disservice by patronizingly encouraging or tolerating poor designs in deployed systems, however well intentioned they may be. -matt --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
