4 ms·
Well, yes, of course. Competently done. Competently done crypotgraphy is rare, and most common cryptography is not competently done. Which is exactly the point
by ergo98 16y ago
Well, yes, of course. Competently done. Competently done crypotgraphy is rare, and most common cryptography is not competently done. Which is exactly the point of my post.
- JoachimSchipper 16y agoMost crypto implementations are vulnerable, yes, but the percentage of vulnerable deployed crypto implementations as a fraction of all deployed implementations looks much better. Note that I'm talking crypto: the OpenSSL people seem quite able to make all sorts of mistakes, but it's almost never the crypto itself that is at fault. (Today's news: a workaround for Netscape's stupidities apparently allows attackers to downgrade to a worse protocol suite in certain cases. Stupid bug, but not crypto per se.) So yes, there are errors, but publishing something AES-encrypted and giving away, say, half the key doesn't tell us anything about those.