Triangulation Cryptography – aka Vector Cryptography.

austin obyrne

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 6:12:42 AM9/16/21

to

Further to a recent post:

This cryptography continues being modelled as a triangle.
The sides of the triangle have been named V 1 , V 2 and V3.
This post introduces a new item for the vector called V2.
The variable V2 is being renamed as "Annexation"

How it Works,

V1:

Vi is calculated firstly according to an algorithm. It is a
displacement vector in R ^3 being defined by a position vector ' Pn '.

Annexation:

Annexation is an arbitrary displacement vector that is added
on to Pn. “Annexation” is so-called because it is literally a value
that is added on to Pn.

V3:

V3 is the vector sum of V1, Annexeation and V 2.

Comment:

‘Annexation’.

This variable name 'Annexation' is thought to be more becoming to my cipher called ASLEC

Austin O’Byrne

austin obyrne

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 6:29:36 AM9/16/21

to

Correction:

>V3 is the vector sum of V1, Annexeation and V 2.

This is incorrect and should read :
V3 is the vector sum of V1 and 'Annexeation' .

Richard Heathfield

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 6:42:47 AM9/16/21

to

Or 'Annexation' possibly.

Not that the spelling is your biggest problem, of course. The whole idea
is your biggest problem.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

Leo

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 10:27:43 AM9/16/21

to

Is it still essentially a One Time Pad that cannot have key reuse?
There was no mixing or anything mentioned on the last thread, so even
if you added an IV or nonce to the key it was still trivial to
decrypt.

--
Leo

Richard Heathfield

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 10:36:56 AM9/16/21

to

On 16/09/2021 15:27, Leo wrote:
> Is it still essentially a One Time Pad that cannot have key reuse?

Yes.

> There was no mixing or anything mentioned on the last thread, so even
> if you added an IV or nonce to the key it was still trivial to
> decrypt.

It is, yes. Bless, eh?

austin obyrne

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 12:06:51 PM9/16/21

to

HI Leo,

There is still a copious algorithm to be understood in this
- I would expect this to be difficult to understand
even by experienced mathematicians - Furthermore
it uses my invention of vector factoring - with due respect
to all readers this cipher algorithm is quite difficult to
comprehend but it is totally kosher - I have tried very
hard to lay it out in diagrams but ti still requires my
personal explanantion.

Comment: it is certainly not related to an OTP in any way.
AOB

Richard Heathfield

unread,

Sep 16, 2021, 12:27:33 PM9/16/21

to

On 16/09/2021 17:06, austin obyrne wrote:
> On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 15:27:43 UTC+1, Leo wrote:
>> Is it still essentially a One Time Pad that cannot have key reuse?
>> There was no mixing or anything mentioned on the last thread, so even
>> if you added an IV or nonce to the key it was still trivial to
>> decrypt.
>>
>> --
>> Leo
> HI Leo,
>
> There is still a copious algorithm to be understood in this
> - I would expect this to be difficult to understand
> even by experienced mathematicians

It's C = P + K. No diffusion, nothing.

> - Furthermore
> it uses my invention of vector factoring - with due respect
> to all readers this cipher algorithm is quite difficult to
> comprehend

Aye. Terribly, terribly difficult.

> Comment: it is certainly not related to an OTP in any way.

That's only because re-keying involves editing the source code and
re-compiling and sharing your changes with Bob without Eve finding out.

So it's more like a polyalphabetic substitution cipher with key re-use.
When you have several messages encrypted with the same key (and if Alice
and Bob use this in earnest, this *will* happen), breaking it is almost
routine.