-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Feb 21, 3:16pm, IPG Sales wrote:
Subject: Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.) Mike, the keys are encrypted with an OTP that only the intended recipient can open - a special, subsystem used for that purpose only - employing the same techniquers, but entirely separate and apart from the primary user system - any inteceptor would have to break trhe system, which we claim is impossible.
see http://www.marcus.rts.com.au/faq/one-time.html for a really brief summary of the assumptions I'm about to use. a) if I use a chunk of data A to encrypt another chunk of data B, then my method of encryption is *not* a one-time pad if size(A) < size(B) b) the security of a one-time-pad O is only as good as any encryption used to exchange O between two parties, which leads to... c) if C. lu`Lez, an Idiotic Pseudo-security Generator, wishes to transmit a chunk of data A to L. User, then for A (if A is truly random to begin with) to have the security of a one-time pad, A must be exchanged using a one-time pad B where size(B) > size(A) d) CONTRADICTION: If C and L already share B, which is greater in size than A, *why is C sending more keys*? Of course, it all works out if you stop expecting A to be a one-time pad when it gets to L. richard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMSuj3h1gtCYLvIJ1AQF1hwP/a7RabRjyXfLSa1IbpdJjP91Su/Rskwjh 8k9GiihQsiQ/nyWkqp8wbNehjNj/n8smz0q+3wQUu5tSotWtv6ws8qJA4ntQhMGi MePVQBX/1XMg2pMOr7VUca0cys/GXxXyJAOgzU/muSLxUkLtlGxwLV06yc5npuo0 j+y4M6igowI= =TVkd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Richard Martin Alias|Wavefront - Toronto Office [Co-op Software Developer, Games Team] rmartin@aw.sgi.com/g4frodo@cdf.toronto.edu http://www.io.org/~samwise Trinity College UofT ChemPhysCompSci 9T7+PEY=9T8 Shad Valley Waterloo 1992