Mimic wrote:
> Chrissy Cruiser wrote:
>
>>
>>>> The fact that the encryption was simple to break is hard to understand
>>>> unless they were busting the passwords. Even the simplest, freeware
>>>> encryption with a strong password can take decades to break.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 22:32:21 +0100, Mimic wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Um thats not true, a strong password does nothing to increase the
>>> effectiveness of the algorithm, it merely slows down brute force
>>> attempts. If you have a weak algorithm, it doesnt matter what your
>>> password is.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don;t think that the USG/DoD is using weak algorithms since those very
>> logics are NSA vetted.
>>
>
>
> Youd be surprised how easy it is to crack "industry standard" encryption
> algorithms ;)
>
Is it? Please elaborate.
And what about multi-layer encryption products?
While these are not "industry standard", it is becoming increasingly
popular to encrypt with multiple standard ciphers, e.g. CryptoSMS.
|