anonymous mail

[Matthew J Ghio]

Karl Barrus wrote:

> Well, you do have to be careful: a large number of keys doesn't
> mean a cipher is hard to break, there may be a faster method
> than brute force.  For instance, those cryptograms some papers
> print in the puzzle section are a simple substition cipher, with
> 26! keys... yet they are also pretty much trivially breakable
> with enough input.

Quite true!  However, as I pointed out, I tried very hard to eliminate
all such possibilities that would allow simplifying the key search
process.  It's also very easy to modify the program to support a larger
key and additional encryption rounds.