On 01/11/2021 07:59, austin obyrne wrote:
> On Monday, 1 November 2021 at 05:57:07 UTC, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 31/10/2021 18:51, MM wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 31 October 2021 at 18:48:05 UTC, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> Bollocks. It's the algorithm.
>>> If you don't know yourself what the key is, then this would be difficult
>>> to separate.
>>> If you can't separate it, you can't explain it.
>>> AOB *should* be able to explain, yet he can't.
>> AOB has, by refusing to disclose details of the algorithm when asked,
>> effectively knocked over the vector cryptography king on his side of the
>> board. There is nothing worth analysing.
> Preparing the excuses already.
Are you now! Well, that shows foresight.
> You have been given a full description of the algorithm in my website.
Then you should have had no difficulty in answering the query from
DaleT, and yet you don't know your own algorithm to be able to answer
> You have given a worked example.
> You have given many descriptive posts in the daily postings to sci.crypt.
> You have been gven an ecryption/decryption model.
> What you are asking for is the explicit keys the entities used in composing thia test.
No, I'm not. I didn't ask you spit, because I know it's pointless.
Someone else - not me - asked you how encryption proceeds. If his
question strayed into the key, it is a sign that your algorithm
description is unclear and needs rewriting.
> You won't be getting that
> You will no doubt claim another BUST.
No, I've already busted vector crypto (as have MM, wizz, and colin) so I
won't be bothering this time around.
> Get on with
You don't get to decide how I spend my time. I see no point in using it
attacking an algorithm that has been laid waste so often and where the
author is incapable of answering basic questions about the algorithm.
> and stop whingeing
Charming; quite, quite charming.
> This certainly is not a bust but you will probably claim that it is.
No; why would I bother to attack a cryptosystem that even the author
doesn't trust enough to explain its algorithm to those who ask? There is
nothing worth attacking. And since you never take any notice of the
fruits of this free work people do for you, why bother putting out
challenges at all? Why not just claim information-theoretical security
and be done with it? Or have you already done that (again)?