If it's so foolish to build your own crypto, how foolish would a Fortune
500 company be to deploy it?
Too bad there's not a crypto hacker service to test out various crypto
algorithms. We're always told to trust the government-sponsored crypto
like AES when we know full well that governments are not trustworthy.
All crypto looks secure ;-)
On 1/6/15 1:32 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 <j...@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,
recruitment
for arcane pursuit of unsolvable mysteries, and hardly applicable to the
long
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. – Harald
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography </x-flowed>
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
