View Single Post
Old 03-26-2008, 07:21 PM   #12
moz
Addict
moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.moz once ate a cherry pie in a record 7 seconds.
 
moz's Avatar
 
Posts: 370
Karma: 1553
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Melbun
Device: Kobo H2O
Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker View Post
It does exist, its called Polymorphic Encryption,
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's secure.

I read their advertising spiel right up to "psuedorandom XOR" and at that point my babble detector overloaded and I had to stop. Anyone who eschews cryptographic descriptions in favour of random jargon is trying to hide something - and in cryptography, normally they're hiding the weakness of their algorithm.

A quick web search suggests that the owner is actively peddling his wares anywhere that crypto novices gather. There's an interesting disassembly of their claims in this forum: http://www.security-forums.com/viewtopic.php?p=69206 On their web pages the author reprints a comment by Schneier "The theory description is so filled with pseudo-cryptography that it's funny to read. Hypotheses are presented as conclusions. Current research is misstated or ignored. The first link is a technical paper with four references, three of them written before 1975. Who needs thirty years of cryptographic research when you have polymorphic cipher theory?" and attempts to argue that since Schneier won't get into a pissing contest with him PMC is obviously perfect.
moz is offline   Reply With Quote