2 ms·

>Could you please elaborate? Lets just say it not only resource burned me because this wasnt just a simple string of data encrypted with an encryption algo, bu

>Could you please elaborate? Lets just say it not only resource burned me because this wasnt just a simple string of data encrypted with an encryption algo, but it would have resource burned anyone else who decided to have a go at decrypting it because of some of the methods I employed. I set out to defeat any automated brute force cracking with Amazon cloud/Bluffdale level of resource at their disposal. This could also apply to quantum computing, because in a way there are probably enough computing devices connected to the net to emulate a quantum computer in near realtime. I turned their weakness into my advantage, but you would have had to have thought out of the box. I cant go into any more details, its as simple as that, so you can say what you like, but I'm not here to convince you, but I will say current internationally recognised encryption methods are just lazy imo. Edit. The difference with the resource burn though is I would get paid anyone else would be needing more tax dollars, so over time it could have been possible to see who was spooking on the reports because of their actions.

eru 5y ago
Thanks for answering. Alas, frankly, you sound like a crank. It's exceptionally easy for a person to devise an encryption system they can't crack. It's exceptionally hard to devise an encryption system others can't crack. That's why generally cryptosystems are only seen as trustworthy when they have been out in the open and been attacked---without success---by many smart people with a track record of breaking cryptosystems. Eg do you know how differential cryptanalysis works? Or linear cryptanalysis? Or assuming you know about RSA, would you be able to figure out which classes of keys are deemed weak without looking it up? (Ie can you repeat this attack?) Do you know which existing cryptographic systems are vulnerable to quantum computers? And which are not? And why?

eru 5y ago

Thanks for answering. Alas, frankly, you sound like a crank. It's exceptionally easy for a person to devise an encryption system they can't crack. It's exceptionally hard to devise an encryption system others can't crack. That's why generally cryptosystems are only seen as trustworthy when they have been out in the open and been attacked---without success---by many smart people with a track record of breaking cryptosystems. Eg do you know how differential cryptanalysis works? Or linear cryptanalysis? Or assuming you know about RSA, would you be able to figure out which classes of keys are deemed weak without looking it up? (Ie can you repeat this attack?) Do you know which existing cryptographic systems are vulnerable to quantum computers? And which are not? And why?