Talk:NSA Suite A Cryptography: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m moved Talk:NSA Suite A to Talk:NSA Suite A Cryptography |
→It sounds stupid: new section |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hi. Whoever removed the 'legacy algorithms,' such as BATON, could you please tell me why? This entire topic is shrouded in secrecy, and I'd like to know what your sources were. [[User:76.180.120.161|76.180.120.161]] 18:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) |
Hi. Whoever removed the 'legacy algorithms,' such as BATON, could you please tell me why? This entire topic is shrouded in secrecy, and I'd like to know what your sources were. [[User:76.180.120.161|76.180.120.161]] 18:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) |
||
== It sounds stupid == |
|||
NSA knows best that "security through obscurity" never works. To say they don't release it is simply asking Wikileaks to the waltz and surely they will leak it. Some 2nd year college student will then find a hole in the algorithm and it gets broken and chicom have a field day over USA. Much better to release any crypto and have the academic community analyse it to death, so no security hole remains hidden. [[Special:Contributions/87.97.105.199|87.97.105.199]] ([[User talk:87.97.105.199|talk]]) 19:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:38, 6 July 2010
Hi. Whoever removed the 'legacy algorithms,' such as BATON, could you please tell me why? This entire topic is shrouded in secrecy, and I'd like to know what your sources were. 76.180.120.161 18:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
It sounds stupid
NSA knows best that "security through obscurity" never works. To say they don't release it is simply asking Wikileaks to the waltz and surely they will leak it. Some 2nd year college student will then find a hole in the algorithm and it gets broken and chicom have a field day over USA. Much better to release any crypto and have the academic community analyse it to death, so no security hole remains hidden. 87.97.105.199 (talk) 19:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)