What I think people react on is that it's really pointless to use decimals and having to keep track of when they repeat. A simple RNG with normal numbers could be used instead, and probably *should* be used unless your crypto really *needs* numbers consisting of primes divided by primes.
So essentially, they hang up on repeating decimals since they expect there to be a reason for why they are needed which they can't find, but there are none AFAIK. - Sent from my tablet Den 19 jun 2012 12:03 skrev "Givonne Cirkin" <[email protected]>: > of course this would fail at the first repeat. briefly stated in the > article in fact. the point made is, that until the first repeat you get a > sequence of non-repeating digits. and, we can generate such a sequence, a > repeating decimal--by equation. so, why not choose the right length > repeating decimal for a message of a given length. > > i don't understand why is it clear to some & they get it right away. why > do others not see it? i thought i was clear to use the sequence up until > the first repeat. > > --- [email protected] wrote: > > From: "James A. Donald" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption > Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:02:27 +1000 > > On 2012-06-18 8:56 PM, Givonne Cirkin wrote: > > 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. > > This fails at the first repeat, and has no relationship to the already > known method of using prime numbers. > _______________________________________________ > cryptography mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography > > > > > _____________________________________________________________ > 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
