[cryptography] QODE(quick offline data encryption)
kevinsisco61784 at gmail.com
Wed Jan 7 13:26:55 EST 2015
On 1/6/2015 6:32 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
> So the practical reason behind everyone saying "unless you have
> qualifications, etc, don't do this" is because, even if you make
> something and say it's just for your learning or a joke or w/e,
> someone (no joke) *will* use it and then some Fortune 500 will fall
> over because of your joke code. So, yeah, don't do this - as in, it'd
> be best to take it down for everyone's sanity.
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:25 PM, John Young <jya at pipeline.com> wrote:
>> At 04:55 PM 1/6/2015, you wrote:
>> Yes, that is the received canon of cryptosystems:
>> 1.Sarcasm toward unqualified efforts,
>> 2. Designing cryptosysystems is *hard*.
>> 3. No, that's too mild, it's mindblowingly* hard.
>> 4. It doesn't start with code, it strts with mathematical description.
>> 5. No, even that is not true, it starts with years of study.
>> 6. Denizens of this list have seen a hundred cryptosystems crash and burn.
>> 7. Some of them designed by very clever people.
>> 8. Designing crytposystems is hard.
>> 9. Don't even think of trying it, not unless a fewyears spent studying the
>> state of the art.
>> 10. Sorry to be blunt.
>> Not to mention how often thclaims are made despite thier sounding like
>> alchemy and astrology, cultish, religious, authoritarian, scientistic,
>> for arcane pursuit of unsolvable mysteries, and hardly applicable to the
>> and varied history of cryptology suffused with bizarre claims, subterfuge,
>> deception, betrayal, treachery, obligatory prevarication, inherent cheating,
>> diabolical misrepresentation of trustworthiness, venomous accusations
>> against competitors, unrestrained dupery and duplicity against the unwary,
>> citizen and royalty alike.
>> Nor that mathematics is a modern innovation in cryptology and remains
>> its weakest element due to inability of its applicators to wed it to code
>> and hardware without recourse to alchemy and astrology favored by
>> promoters, sales and PhDs who dream of math as golden key to natsec.
>> QODE, QED.
>>> Kevin wrote: > I figured I'd start building my own open source encryption
>>> algorithm: > https://github.com/kjsisco/qode If you feel overwhelmed by the
>>> sarcasm directed your way, there is a reason for that. Designing
>>> cryptosystems is *hard*. No, that's too mild. Is *mindblowingly* hard. It
>>> doesn't start with code. It starts with a mathematical description. No, even
>>> that is not true: It starts with years and years of study. The denisens of
>>> this list have seen a hundred cryptosystem crash and burn. Some of them were
>>> designed by very clever people. Did I mention that designing cryptosystems
>>> is hard? Don't even think of trying it, not unless you have first spent a
>>> few years studying the state of the art. Sorry to be so blunt, but I think
>>> it will save you a whole lot of grief. â€“ Harald
>>> _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list
>>> cryptography at randombit.net
>>> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography </x-flowed>
>> cryptography mailing list
>> cryptography at randombit.net
> cryptography mailing list
> cryptography at randombit.net
Any company could review it and decide if it's worth using or not.
Quite frankly, if you wanted to print out my code and wipe your rear end
with it, that's fine by me. Use it, don't use it, laugh at it, don't
laugh at it. I am not going to take it down. Freedom, boys and girls,
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
More information about the cryptography