Natanael <[email protected]> wrote:
> One: On the second paper, you assume a prime number as long as the message is 
> secure, and give an example of a message of 500 characters. Assuming ASCII 
> coding and compression, that will be just a few hundred bits. RSA (using 
> primes too) of 1024 bits is now being considered insecure by more and more 
> people. I'm afraid that simple bruteforce could break your scheme quite fast. 
> Also, why not use simple XOR in that case?
> 

Yep - bruteforce will work here.
btw - when it comes to 'non-decryptable encryption' I still like OTP. :)
Read or re-read Steven Bellovins wonderfull piece about Frank Miller, the 
Inventor of the One-Time Pad 
https://mice.cs.columbia.edu/getTechreport.php?techreportID=1460

I'm not a rude guy and try not to diminish your archievments but there's some 
truth in the following sentence: Even if clever beyond description the odds 
that someone without too much experience in the field can revolutionize 
cryptography are small. Can't remember who said this - or something similar to 
this - but it's true anyhow. Think about this every time when I try to 'invent' 
something within my fields. :)

--Michael


> 
> Den 18 jun 2012 12:56 skrev "Givonne Cirkin" <[email protected]>:
> Hi,
> 
> My name is Givon Zirkind.  I am a computer scientist.  I developed a method 
> of encryption that is not decryptable by method.  
> You can read my paper at: http://bit.ly/Kov1DE
> 
> My colleagues agree with me.  But, I have not been able to get pass peer 
> review and publish this paper.  In my opinion, the refutations are ridiculous 
> and just attacks -- clear misunderstandings of the methods.  They do not 
> explain my methods and say why they do not work.
> 
> I have a 2nd paper:  http://bit.ly/LjrM61  
> This paper also couldn't get published.  This too I was told doesn't follow 
> the norm and is not non-decryptable.  Which I find odd, because it is merely 
> the tweaking of an already known method of using prime numbers.
> 
> I am asking the hacking community for help.  Help me test my methods.  The 
> following message is encrypted using one of my new methods.  Logically, it 
> should not be decryptable by "method".  If you can decrypt it, please let me 
> know you did & how.  
> 
> CipherText:
> 
> 113-5-95-5-65-46-108-108-92-96-54-23-51-163-30-7-34-117-117-30-110-36-12-102-99-30-77-102
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I have a website about this:  www.givonzirkind.weebly.com
> For information about the Transcendental Encryption Codec click on the "more" 
> tab.
> Also, on Facebook,  https://www.facebook.com/TranscendentalEncryptionCodecTec
> 
> Givon Zirkind
> 
> 
>  
> You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cryptography mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cryptography mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Reply via email to