Pure Python Data Mangling or Encrypting

[Johannes Bauer]

On 26.06.2015 22:09, Randall Smith wrote:

> And that's why we're having this discussion.  Do you know of an attack
> in which you can control the output (say at least 100 consecutive bytes)
> for data which goes through a 256 byte translation table, chosen
> randomly from 256! permutations after the data is sent.  If you do, I'm
> all ears!  But at this point you're just setting up straw men and
> knocking them down.

Oh and I wanted to comment on this as well, but sent my reply too soon.

You misunderstand. This is now how it works, this is not how any of this
works. Steven does not *at all* have to prove to you your system is
breakable or show actual attacks. YOU have to prove that your system is
secure. Either analytically or you wait until you have peer review and
cryptanalysis by actual experts.

It's *very* easy to set up a badly flawed obfuscation system that can't
be broken by laymen in a Python newsgroup and which appers to be secure.
This does not imply one bit that it is even remotely secure.

Cheers,
Johannes

-- 
>> Wo hattest Du das Beben nochmal GENAU vorhergesagt?
> Zumindest nicht öffentlich!
Ah, der neueste und bis heute genialste Streich unsere großen
Kosmologen: Die Geheim-Vorhersage.
 - Karl Kaos über Rüdiger Thomas in dsa <hidbv3$om2$1 at speranza.aioe.org>