🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <n0e48t@ofa123.fidonet.org> Erik.Lindano@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
> 
> Well, I said I wouldn't, but I went and read Loen's long FAQ post 
> anyway. Just to show that I am equanimous. According to what I glean 
> from his words, decrypting NuCrypt output should be an absolute, 
> total, unmitigated pea-soup task for any self-respecting 
> cryptologist (-grapher?). The challenge opened widely nearly every 
> fundamental avenue of attack, as mentioned in Loen's post: 
> 
>  1. "Cipher text only" attack. Unnecessary. See below.
>      
>  2. "Known plaintext" attack.  The NuCrypt challenge offers complete 
>      availability of the original plaintext, except one word or two. 
>      You are only asked to decrypt this ONE WORD or TWO, nothing 
>      more! Plain English. Eight chars. Piece of cake.
>      
>  3. "Chosen plaintext" attack. Analysts have been invited to submit 
>      plaintext of their own choosing - 99%!  Only ONE unknown word 
>      would be ebedded in your own plaintext, and the whole then
>      encrypted. You are only asked to decrypt this ONE WORD having
>      both the plaintext and ciphertext of ALL OTHER WORDS. What 
>      could be easier?

All of those attacks presuppose knowledge of the algorithm.   In the real
world, a cryptanalyst has access to the algorithm.

Bruce