Re: Will Ada-95 Programs Written in MS Windows Run in MacOS and Linux Without Some Tweaking.

[Austin Obyrne <austin.obyrne@hotmail.com>]

On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:46:53 AM UTC, Simon Wright wrote:
> Austin Obyrne <austin.obyrne@hotmail.com> writes: > The transition of this crypto from Windows to Mac is quite something > and to my limited experience is a formidable task. No. I've put extensions at [1]; the README.txt says ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The files here are intended to work with the SureCrypt software from http://www.adacryptpages.com. They are written against version 85610, and are relatively minor modifications of that software, so the copyright status remains that of the original (Copyright © 2003 Austin O'Byrne). There are two new programs: encrypt and decrypt. Encrypt usage: encrypt original-plaintext ciphertext Decrypt usage: decrypt ciphertext decrypted-plaintext Note that in spite of the use of the word "text" above the programs will work with binary data. The programs will work on Unix and Windows systems. Data encrypted on one can be decrypted on the other if required. Using a recent GNAT compiler, the programs can be built using the supplied cipher.gpr: gnatmake -p -P cipher Simon Wright simon@pushface.org December 2013 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From the software point of view, note that on Linux (which has a case-sensitive file system) you should use lower case for Ada source file names, so that, for example, Alices_Digital_Signature.ads becomes alices_digital_signature.ads. From the practical point of view, I think that the size of the encrypted files will be a serious issue. With the current code, they come out *more* *than* *30* *times* the size of the original, so that the encrypted SureCrypt85610.zip comes out at about 870 megabytes. Even if you output the encrypted data in binary the multiplier will be 12 (each byte of the original is encrypted as 3 integers). [1] https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a84i0jb8jv48nev/Q143ubNUWC

Having had time to assimilate your analysis properly I think the benefit for me is that I can now say to the crypto world that my ciphers in broad principle will run in any of the three main operating systems in main stream usage.

This is a huge plank being added to the platform.

The way things are going and the rate at which it is happening suggest to me that the problem of the large ciphertext is going to fall away in time to come with regard to assessing the usefulness of my cryptography.  These are problems to be solved but they have clear cut solutions that can be got to grips with by ordinary technology unlike the cryptography algorithms that is still in a different world.

For me personally, your analysis confirms my instincts that real life cryptography has benefited from my inventions.

One solution might be to use hexadecimal conversions on the ciphertext - not a great one I think.

* If you ever get the time and the inclination to perform a similar exercise as you have just done on the scalar cipher called “Scalable Key Cipher” you will find that the ciphertext volume is reduced by 2/3.  Each item of ciphertext is comprised of one only of the three large integers that comprises its stable companion vector ciphertext in that cipher called “SureCrypt”.

In passing, PGP crypto in practice has to be propped up by the RSA cipher to complete the digital signature part – it won’t be around in a few years time in my view.

http://www.adacryptpages.com/  - please see,

“Scalable Key Cipher “ – October 2013 for Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7 & 8.

Many thanks again for your great contribution – I might have had to wait years for what you have done in a few weeks.

Austin.