Re: [cryptography] Google GO Differential Analysis

2013-05-30 Thread Givonne Cirkin
fyi: google has a programming language "GO". it is designed for parallel processing. there is an apps stack feature. tells you what resources, including cpu resources, are being used, when in your program. so, you can see usage, in a chart. then, click on a usage spot. you'll be taken directly to the code running. i think this would be a really good tool for differential analysis.golang.orgalso, the google cloud will keep the snapshoots of the program usage.You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] index of coincidence

2013-04-25 Thread Givonne Cirkin
it would be appreciated  a help, if someone can give me a link to freeware, 
preferrably source code in 
C, to a program that calculates the index of coincidence from a byte stream.

thanks.  much appreciated.


_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] index of coincidence freeware

2013-04-25 Thread Givonne Cirkin
can anyone give me a link to freeware, source code, for a program that analyzes a byte stream for its index of coincidence?preferably in C.thanks.You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] open source cryptanalysis

2012-09-19 Thread Givonne Cirkin

does anyone know of an open source, freeware, GPL, cryptanalysis s/w like 
evercrack, except for windows?

i couldn't find window binaries for evercrack.

thanks.

g.

_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] TEC Transcendental Encryption

2012-07-26 Thread Givonne Cirkin
I have programmed another prototype codec for Frequency. normalization. It is available from my website, www.givonzirkind.weebly.com On the download page. You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-07-05 Thread Givonne Cirkin
Thanks for all those who gave constructive criticism.  The revised article is 
available at Cornell's archive:  http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.4080

Givon


_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin
yes.  just with a specific choice of key.

--- jam...@echeque.com wrote:

From: James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com
To: givo...@37.com
CC: cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:48:01 +1000

On 2012-06-19 8:03 PM, Givonne Cirkin wrote: 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.

This is just one time pad.







_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin

yes.  and i covered this.  esp. when the issue applies to the stenagraphic 
component.  using phi as a model of the method.  but, phi is well known  
predictable.  however, other sequences not.

--- jth...@astro.indiana.edu wrote:

From: Jonathan Thornburg jth...@astro.indiana.edu
To: jam...@echeque.com, cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:30:59 -0400 (EDT)

The digit sequence
  0.1234567891011121314151617181920212223...
(or its equivalent in binary, hex, or your other favorite base)
never repeats, but provides no security whatsoever.  One-time pads
need nonrepeating sequences *which the adversary can't predict*.

-- 
-- Jonathan Thornburg [remove -animal to reply] 
jth...@astro.indiana-zebra.edu
   Dept of Astronomy  IUCSS, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA
   Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.
  -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography




_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin

curious, why don't some ppl trust link shortners?  is that a generation gap 
thing.

2nd.  ur guesses are wrong.  i was born in the USA.  my parents were born in 
the USA.  my native language is English.  my parent's native language is 
English.  i grew up speaking English @ home.  i went to public school where 
they taught us in--English.  non one translated my paper.  and, i have been 
offered jobs writing papers.  in fact, i was the editor of a collegiate 
technical newsletter for academic computing for several years.  so, some of 
your guesses are bit off.

different ppl use different lingo for different reasons.  for me, in this 
instance is, because my interaction is more on a literary level than personal.

putting that aside.  i think submission to AMS the American Mathematical 
Society was appropriate.  submission to ACM American Computing Machinery which 
has published me several times before, was also appropriate.  after stating 
that, i do get comments from others that don't understand it either.

as to the math not being new, in regards to frequency normalization, this is 
simply not correct.  in regards to the second method, which is a combination of 
methods, the math of combined methods is new.  the strength is in the 
combination of the methods.

having said all that, i agree the paper could be clearer.  but, just by judging 
by the reaction on this board, it is clear enough to get the major points 
across.  even you concede the math is potentially ok.  this isn't the 1st paper 
i've written.  or, have rejected.  or been asked to resubmit.  had i been given 
suggestions to make it clearer, i would accept that.  several of the ppl on 
this board have raised real intellectual issues. more as to the implementation. 
 which i also c as a problem.  (whoops don't trust abbreviaters!)



--- bill.stew...@pobox.com wrote:

From: Bill Stewart bill.stew...@pobox.com
To: givo...@37.com
Cc: cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:44:21 -0700

At 03:56 AM 6/18/2012, 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/Kov1DEhttp://bit.ly/Kov1DE

I don't trust link shorteners.

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.

If you can't get the paper to pass peer review, and you think it's 
because the reviewers clearly don't understand your methods, this 
means one of several things
- You haven't found the right peer reviewers - Are you submitting 
your paper to an appropriate journal?
- Your math really is broken or not new, and you're not understanding 
their refutations.
- Your math is potentially ok, but your paper isn't written clearly 
enough for the reviewers to understand how your methods really work, 
so you need to get some help with the writing.
 Technical writing is difficult work, and the more complex a 
topic you're writing about, the clearer and simpler your writing needs to be.
 Part of that is the logical development of your paper - are 
you showing all the important steps, and showing how the parts 
connect together, but part of that is really just language.

For instance, your email message that I'm replying to uses 
terminology that's not at all the way anybody writes about 
cryptography in English.  I'm guessing your native language is one of 
the Romance languages, and that whoever translated your paper doesn't 
do cryptography in English?
I'm guessing that when you say not decryptable, you either mean 
It's a hash function, where the output contains less entropy than 
the input, and is therefore not reversable, or you mean It's not 
decryptable by somebody who knows your algorithm and doesn't know the 
password, with N bits of password entropy (where you aren't bothering 
to mention N for some reason.)  The other interpretation I could 
think of is The encryption method isn't implementable by 
mathematical algorithms, because it's using quantum physics for 
non-determinism (in which case you'd probably have said it was 
quantum), or because you're doing something tricky with chaos theory 
(and the community's experience has been 'Sorry, that trick never 
works.')   Since you said Bruce Schneier told you to look at hash 
functions, I'm leaning toward that guess.



I have a 2nd paper:  http://bit.ly/LjrM61http://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

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-19 Thread Givonne Cirkin

absolutely true.  i mentioned (in my article) that after explaining the masking.

--- jth...@astro.indiana.edu wrote:

From: Jonathan Thornburg jth...@astro.indiana.edu
To: jam...@echeque.com, cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:30:59 -0400 (EDT)

The digit sequence
  0.1234567891011121314151617181920212223...
(or its equivalent in binary, hex, or your other favorite base)
never repeats, but provides no security whatsoever.  One-time pads
need nonrepeating sequences *which the adversary can't predict*.

-- 
-- Jonathan Thornburg [remove -animal to reply] 
jth...@astro.indiana-zebra.edu
   Dept of Astronomy  IUCSS, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA
   Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.
  -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography




_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography