Decrypting the Secret to Strong Security

farrellj writes "Cnet has an excellent article by Whitfield Diffie, who has probably has forgotten more about crypto than 99.9% of us will ever know, explains why secrecy does not equal security. The article also addresses the whole "open source vs proprietary software" security issue. A definite *must read* for anyone concerned about security...and that should be everyone!"

Comments

Accuracy

[Anonymous Coward]

who has probably has forgotten more about crypto than 99.9% of us will ever know

What's the margin of error on that figure?

Re:Accuracy

[Anonymous Coward]

It is known that 84.2% of people make up percentages on the spot... I would bet that the rest use outdated data (e.g. older than 1 second).

Easy Secure Encryption

[Anonymous Coward]

I just double ROT-13 everything for maximum protection. It seems to work so far. -- Note this message has been encrypted with double ROT-13 any attempts to understand it will in violation of the DMCA and will be duly noted.

Re:Easy Secure Encryption

[KDan]

You fool! As is well known to anyone who follows Microsoft security bulletins (and who knows more about security than Microsoft) you need to use octuple-ROT-13 at least to guarantee good security!

Daniel

Re:Easy Secure Encryption

[haystor]

Can anyone from a non-DMCA country crack his ROT-13 and translate? I'd love to know what this guy said.

Re:Easy Secure Encryption

[FroMan]

You could always rot26 it since, that would be twice as secure as rot13.

OR!

I always use primes... everyone in crytology knows you need to use primes. So, you have to use two primes, like rot13 it 5 times, then 3 times. How do you think its going to work without using primes?

OR!

Another way to secure your data is to use rot(prime). I also found that you can rot3 and then rot23 it, or even rot7 and rot19.

Luckly I didn't do that to this post or else it might have been impossible to ever read.

He's right, you know

[Chocolate Teapot]

The secret to strong security: less reliance on secrets

I have a couple of rottweilers and make no secret of it. Wanna try some social engineering on them?

Re:He's right, you know

[Anonymous Coward]

"Social engineering" on a Rottweiler is actually very easy. You bribe the dog with a nice tasty steak (or a big doggie biscuit, or some other treat).

Re:He's right, you know

[Chocolate Teapot]

Every seen how much steak it takes to bribe a Rottweiler? It's gonna cost you an arm and a leg ;)

Re:He's right, you know

[stinky wizzleteats]

I have a couple of rottweilers and make no secret of it. Wanna try some social engineering on them?

No problem. For my demonstration, I will require a large explosive robot dressed in a female rottweiler suit.

Secrecy DOES equal Security

[MojoMonkey]

... unless a woman enters the loop!

Re:Secrecy DOES equal Security

[Anonymous Coward]

... unless a woman enters the loop!

So that must mean that most slashdotters are the most secure people on the planet.

Re:Secrecy DOES equal Security

[MojoMonkey]

You have never ever seen a woman, you never will

Then what the hell was it that put a gold band on my ring finger??? Now I'm scared to go home, thanks alot.

IANAL, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you depend on a secret for your security, what do you do when the secret is discovered?"

Doh! That's obvious - Use the DCMA to sue their butts.

MY BOX IS UNHACKABLE

[zapfie]

My IP is 127.0.0.1. Do your worst.

Re:FP! ...anyway...

[brejc8]

Whitfield Diffie, who has probably has forgotten more about crypto than 99.9% of us will ever know, explains why secrecy does not equal security.

And he would tell us all about it if he had a mouth

Re:So many bugs

[evilviper]

Well, the problem is that more and more people keep showing up, despite the man with the machine gun.