paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk writes:
Comment: "What do you mean by 'extensive research'." Reply: Benchmark tests. Source code comparisons. Documentations of other algorithms. "Applied Cryptography".
So you have read applied cryptography and decided that qualifies you as a cryptographer?
That's much better that Paul Bradley who's totally ignorant of cryptography. But I agree that Bruce's book is neither necessary nor sufficient for someone wanting to learn cryptography.
Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions?
This is irrelevant rubbish, if there is a cryptanalytic attack on your algorithm a brute force attack becomes unecessary and key size is not of consequence.
What charming manners. And Paul Bradley's own rants about "brute force attacks on one-time pads" are not rubbish, I suppose? And how come Paul didn't use the word "fuck" in every paragraph, the way he usually does? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps