Re: Ada Connections to this Crypto.

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

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 8:28:36 PM UTC, Simon Wright wrote:
> Austin Obyrne <austin.obyrne@hotmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I have been harassed by some readers with claims that there are ways
> > by which 'any' data can be called (whatever that means)and encryption
> > will still work.  They seem to be saying that this is done by
> > user-defined enumeration types that can be used instead of ASCII or
> > Latin-1.
> 
> I rather think I take offence at that. You imply that the program I
> wrote using your crypto to encrypt/decrypt a ZIP file (which is anything
> but Latin-1 text!) was bogus.
> 
> :plonk:

Clearly, what I have suggested earlier is already being done indirectly by the other key-sets in every crypto scheme so it is not to be expected that using customized "Information Interchange" (Using the extract from ASCII) has any erstwhile latent benefits. 

I am more interested in your take on using Sequential_IO (being advocated to me) instead of my preferred Text_IO which is totally adequate as it stands.

What really puzzles me is the inference that using sequential_IO for which I would have to create crypto instances has extra *cryptographic properties that will enable any data type to be be encrypted.  I don't think the people saying this realise that reading in data is very, very easy by many methods whereas encrypting it unbreakably after you have got it in is very, very difficult and changing the method of reading it in seems to be the undoing of an already  very robust current system.

I would be grateful for your opinion on this because a number of people seem to be mixing up the CS with the Crypto. Nothing one does with the method of reading in data for encryption will make it easier to encrypt.

adacrypt