🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <n0eeet@ofa123.fidonet.org> Erik.Lindano@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
>Writes rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp):
> > To assert a NIH attitude is absurd, given that there is no _here_ 
> > here. 
> 
> Oh yes, there is!  Gosh, we even have a FAQ post and everything...
> We have people who support each other against newcomers.  There is a
> remarkable solidarity among the "in" crowd.  FAQ + solidarity 
> creates a definite "here" place.  Don't you think?  ;-)

Not _Invented_ Here.  Precious few, if any, of the well-regarded
encryption schemes were developed on sci.crypt.  And those with
high regards gained these regards by withstanding the strongest
attack: given everything but the key, devise a way better than
exhaustive keyspace attack to decrypt a message.


> > If your friend is truly interested in having experts assess the 
> > security of this algorithm, s/he must submit the _algorithm_ to 
> > the experts -- not the _output_ of the algorithm.
> We certainly don't want to do that. The output is the challenge,
> not the algorithm. 

Which is fine, as far as it goes, but most on sci.crypt are more
interested in the algolrithm than the puzzle output.  rec.games.misc
might have been a better place for this particular challange.

		--Ken Pizzini