From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.50.128.226 with SMTP id nr2mr2999597igb.2.1418749213566; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:00:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.108.161 with SMTP id j30mr1911qgf.42.1418749213423; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:00:13 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newspeer1.nac.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!h15no23150495igd.0!news-out.google.com!n9ni50qai.0!nntp.google.com!w8no8588684qac.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:00:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=5.80.153.30; posting-account=pmkN8QoAAAAtIhXRUfydb0SCISnwaeyg NNTP-Posting-Host: 5.80.153.30 References: <1a2fea61-bcc1-43a9-b6e3-edf474308402@googlegroups.com> <021184f0-18ef-40bc-ba62-fd307998fe1c@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ada Connections to this Crypto. From: Austin Obyrne Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:00:13 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24049 Date: 2014-12-16T09:00:13-08:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 11:47:27 AM UTC, jo...@peppermind.com wrote: > > Because it is a universal standard there is no need for the entities to= send copies of it to each other. This is a hugely important benefit that = is invariably taken for granted because of the sheer familiarity that we al= l enjoy with it - i.e. because we are using 'standard' computers and 'stand= ard' programming languages that have ASCII as the inbuilt code the intrinsi= c comparator for buying and selling is ASCII. >=20 > If you're interested in text encryption, why don't you use Unicode? For e= xample UTF-32? It's also a standard and has a vastly larger character range= , including all kinds of scripts from many different languages. It's not ye= t as ubiquitous as ASCII, but you can read Unicode text on any halfway mode= rn PC and mobile phone and there are plenty of converters between different= Unicode versions (UTF-8, UTF-16, UTF-32). >=20 > Sticking to ASCII makes your program outdated from the start. >=20 > Another thing you might want to consider are code books. You can download= huge dictionary files for a language, e.g. English, and then swap words or= compress words into smaller numbers using your encryption scheme based on = the code book, which must be shared between the two parties. You could do t= his in a way that two people can agree on an arbitrary code book of their c= hoice. >=20 > If the code book is kept secret (=3Dhuge shared secret), this can add an = additional layer of security on top of the character-based encryption, and = if you assign numbers to code book positions it can also compress the messa= ge tremendously. >=20 > Just some ideas/suggestions. Hi Jo, By coincidence, that scheme is already well hand - as you say it is not ubi= quitous yet - a useful aside that I am promoting at times is that the entir= e set of code points reduces to the sixteen hexadecimal digits of Unicode (= UTF 32 and none other is considered by me) and ASCII while also being withi= n Unicode itself can be commissioned (in the West) in a surrogate role to e= ncrypt all of Unicode code points with much greater ease than addressing ea= ch one. Thanks - adacrypt