Re: I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...

On 8 May 2008 00:00:25 -0400, "Keith F. Lynch"
<kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>David V. Loewe, Jr <daveloewe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> If you're using good quality encryption, they may still be able to
>>> tap it, but that doesn't mean they can tell what's being said.
>
>> If they REALLY want to know, they'll let the NSA play with it.
>> And they'll find out.
>
>I doubt that very much.  Computer power helps code-makers far more
>than code-breakers.

Really good codes are unbreakable.  Given sufficient time and
effort, any cipher (which is what you appear to be discussing),
can be cracked.

It is important not to confuse the two.  Good codes don't require
any computing power at all, merely an agreement between two
parties what each element represents, whether it be a word, a
phrase, or a proprietary symbol.  For example, if a 4-digit
number refers to a particular word on a particular page of a book
known only to the sender and receiver, then no amount of
computing power can break that code.  And if the _next_ 4-digit
number refers to some _other_ book, and means the first letters
of two words, and the _next_ 4-digit number is entirely
meaningless, etc., woe be to the cryptanalyst who is throwing
mental effort at the problem, rather than "turning" either the
sender or the receiver, or finding some other way of getting the
key that lets the receiver know where to look.
-- 
Doug Wickström
har fiol, vill resa