>> Transporting media in a secure manner over the Web is inherently
>> problematic, but as long as we're moving media around in a MetaCard stack it
>> raises an interesting question:
>>
>> Why not put media (text, images) in a MetaCard stack as a wrapper, then set
>> a password for it for transport?
>
> The password only prevents the stack from being modified but it's still
> functional.
> You would have to put data in scripts.
On the contrary -- try this:
1. Make a new stack with a field, and put some data in the field.
2. Set the passkey for the stack
3. Save it and close it
4. Drop the stack file on any tool that will let you open binary files, and
check out your data: its encrypted.
-- now try this:
5. Open the stack in MC again, and set the passkey to empty to clear it
6. Drop it on your file editor again, and check out your field contents:
it's all readable.
Interesting, eh? This seems to work for custom properties as well.
I don't imagine it does anything as useful with images, but for textual data
it's ultra cool.
Moreover, since we have very flexible custom properties in addition to
fields, and we also have images, the range of things that can be bundled
into a MetaCard stack are broad and flexible.
But the core question remains: Just how secure is this? Is there any
useful comparisons to other encryption algorithms that one could use to
convey relative security?
Of course I don't expect anything that would enable one to break MC stacks,
just some high-level comparison with other methods to help clients get a
grasp of its security.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
Multimedia Design and Development for Mac, Windows, UNIX, and the Web
_____________________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com
Tel: 323-225-3717 ICQ#60248349 Fax: 323-225-0716
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
