Encrypted data sample

[Shari]

>A truly random source is of course more secure.  For example, NSA 
>uses cosmic emissions. However, the important point, is not whether 
>it is unbreakable, but rather, whether it is feasible to break it. 
>For instance, many institutions such as banks use Public Key cyphers 
>which *are* breakable in theory.  However, the fastest computers in 
>existence would take millions of years to determine the underlying 
>key so for all practical purposes, the code is unbreakable.  Thus, 
>unless one is using the code for something which will attract the 
>attention of the National Security Agency, the pseudo random numbers 
>generated by a computer are, for all practical reasons, unbreakable. 
>The main point to remember is that any cypher is simply a fence. 
>The idea is to make the fence high enough so that its impractical 
>for others to try to climb over it.

Sounds like an argument me and my fella are having.  There's a 
burglar loose in the neighborhood, and he (they) have hit nearly 
every house around us.  I am the gung ho let's keep the suckers out 
sort.  He is the "well if they wanta get in bad enough, they will 
find a way" sort.

I've kept burglars out in the past, in neighborhoods where all my 
neighbors were robbed.  Make your house a pain in the arse to get 
into, and they will get frustrated and find easier pickin's.

The fella, he thinks my methods are overkill, and doesn't see the 
necessity.  (Course, he's never been robbed, and I have.  I'm sure 
he'd see it differently if he came home one day to all his goodies 
missing.)

Moral of the story:  Make it harder to accomplish, and you will 
eliminate a good many codebreakers.  Not all, but most likely the 
ones that would have broken you.

Shari C
Gypsy King Software
-- 
--Shareware Games for the Mac--
http://www.gypsyware.com