Anonglish (was: Re: Authenticating Meat)

[Thomas Shaddack]

> At 03:42 PM 4/28/03 +0100, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> >If you have perfect compression, and you encrypt a message which has been
> >compressed, any decryption will look sensible.
>
> You do understand that building this kind of compressor implies passing the
> Turing test, right?  For the messages to be sensible, they have to have
> some underlying meaning that makes sense.  This isn't just compression in
> the sense of fast implementations of statistical models of text....

Layer the encryptions then. A good ciphertext looks random. Take a
ciphertext and encrypt it again, you get a - say - cipher2text. A
decryption of cipher2text with any key then looks like a potential
ciphertext.

Is there a hole in this claim?