It's nice that you claim to be interested in learning more about Polymorphic Encryption.
ENCRYPTSTICK ALTERNATIVE SOFTWARE
The question is: Who pays people who write disk encryption software (with pre-boot functionality!) that is totally free of charge? No idea if this is head-scratching misinformation, but it could be the case that your modern cryptographic goals are just as important as the classic ones in this field. Troutman, I honestly agree with you that implementation issues are of primary concern: A nice man showed me this today: I try to do more useful things in my life than writing posts in forums. I'll never be able to make five posts per day. But there seems to be little interest in doing this in "Ghost Writer City". Only by taking history into account, the likelihood is high that it is possible to improve encryption algorithms that are available to the public. NO.ĭoes the military use AES? No idea, but I guess not. declared unbreakable in 1977 and being broken in 1997. Ok, was the Enigma properly designed? Without any doubt: NO. I'm not, in the slightest bit, convinced that he possesses the cryptographic competence required to design cryptographic primitives.
Here's the link:Īt the time I was amazed how a human being could possibly post 1223 comments (or replies) within less than 8 months! That's more than 5 posts per day! The only logical explanation for this is that he's got a number of ghost writers and that these people get paid for their work!Ĭomments that are intended to take somebody apart without going into details are easy to write: ". Stick with standards going against the grain doesn't pay in this field. Trying to ad hoc the implementation of a non-standard, overly-complex, and largely-unknown is the most counterproductive and fruitless risk one could take, and one that I can't see any justification for, in an arena where cryptography falls apart because of the implementation, not the mathematics. As such, deploying his methodologies in a real-world setting seems rather antithetical to state-of-the-art best practice. Röellgen nearly eight years ago, and while I feel he means well, I'm not, in the slightest bit, convinced that he possesses the cryptographic competence required to design cryptographic primitives.
The entire presentation of his methodologies lacks in both sense and convention. On the contrary, there isn't such a paper, and you'll be hard-pressed to find any academic papers on cryptography by Mr. This is the way cryptographers propose new cryptographic primitives, after all. Röellgen is touted as "one of the foremost experts in the field of cryptography," along with the boast that his polymorphic offering is the "world's strongest encryption algorithm," you'd think there'd be an academic paper that clearly states, with mathematical proofs, its resistance to specific cryptanalytical attacks.
It's in one's best interest to shy away from this product, as it incorporates Bernd Röellgen's proprietary polymorphic encryption.
0 kommentar(er)
