What Does Non-Decryptable By Method Mean?
"What one man can do, another man can undo." -- Sherlock Holmes
David Kahn wrote, describing One Time Encryption Pad (OTP), that this was the first time that an encryption method was theoretically not decryptable by method. I think this phrase accurately describes the strength of the encryption. Perhaps, the message can be deciphered. But, not by method or algorithm. It can be deciphered by guessing every key. That is exactly what happened historically. An attempt will have to be made with every possible key. In other words, it could be deciphered--with brute force--given sufficient time. Sufficient time might be beyond the lifetime of an individual. Which was the case at the time of the inception of OTP. But, no algorithm, such as frequency analysis, will decipher the ciphertext for sure. There is no quick short cut.
Major advances in computers have made brute force of OTP very practical.
When I originally used this phrase to describe my methods, I felt (and continue to do so), that this too describes my methods. Perhaps the decryption can be guessed. Maybe, by cycling through all known steganographic masks or; binary bases can the original message be guessed. However, the time to cycle through all the possibilities and permutations is very large. Much larger than the possible keys for OTP. But, by method--not by guessing and cycling through all possiblities--but, by method, with an algorithm, decryption will not be possible.
Brute force is not a method!
Therefore, TEC is non-decryptable by method.
Ultimately, this world is finite. The possible number of masks and substitutions are finite. No matter how large the number. Since the possibilities, permutations and combinations of TEC are greater than OTP by factorials and orders of magnitude; the power of brute force necessary to crack TEC is far greater than OTP.
If TEC is or is not impervious to current technology remains to be seen. So far, no one has answered my challenge that it is.
All the above is mentioned tersely in my paper, "WindTalking Computers". I thought a more overt explanation was necessary.
Last Updated: October 11, 2012 08:17