On 18 oct, 02:13, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:57 PM, David Robinow <drobi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:48 PM, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> For the love of baby kittens, please, please, please tell me that > >> you do not believe this securely encrypts your data. > > Yeah, I think it's pretty good. > > Can you do better? > > Trivially. Use AES, 3DES, any standard cryptosystem- there are > literally dozens of excellent, well-studied implementations in > both C++ and Python, and hardware implementations on many > processors. > > The cipher listed will fall in a single round of chosen plaintext > attacks or chosen ciphertext attacks, and with a keylength of > 40 bytes against a message length of 768 will give me roughly > 19 windows on a single encryption. Frequency analysis is > therefore going to be extremely profitable, not to mention > trivially easy. > > Geremy Condra
Thanks a lot Tim ! @Geremy : this is not a methode to encrypt data it is more a methode to encode /decode strings for exemple to store passwords that need to be used by others programs yes it 's insecure but there is no secure way to store password that 's need to be retrieve PS : sorry for my english -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
