Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JammyJim
I am curious as to whether all these encryption programs on the net e.g. this one are actually any good.
|
Verifying security software can be a lengthy and tedious task. Personally i wouldnt trust any closed security software coming from the US or the UK (or several other countries) because they have a long history of intentionally weakening encryption for law enforcement. Now you may say "but thats ok, i dont really have anything to hide from the government" but the problem is that "the bad guys" arent stupid and like to use those weaknesses too.
I dont see the point in verifying that software if you can get
TrueCrypt for free which has much better features and no such silly restrictions like 25mb "containers", is open sourced, portable and verified while the software you linked to doesnt even seem to offer the source of their encryption algo(s) for verification.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nodrog
No (non-quantum) encryption is literally unbreakable, but you can reduce the probability of it being broken by brute force so low that it become unbreakable in practice.
|
Cryptographers might disagree:
One-time-pads
You cant directly compare key lengths of symmetric and asymmetric cyphers like people keep doing. A 256bit key of a symmetrical cypher is very strong while a 256bit key for a asymmetric cypher is a joke nowadays. PGP is "the" standard asymmetric cypher and i wouldnt use less then 2048bits with those.
The trouble with PGP and for Phil Zimmermann (PGP "author") was that the US law defined any encryption above 40 bit key length as munition and therefore he was charged with violating export laws which has severe penalties. The case ran for some years and was later dropped.