Linked by David Adams on Wed 17th Aug 2011 17:53 UTC, submitted by HAL2001
Permalink for comment 485767
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-01-13
There is theoretical encryption and practical encryption. In reality good enough is more than adequate.
a) No one will even attempt to crack even basic encryption unless there is a relatively big incentive for doing so eg solve a major crime or obtain important military secrets.
b) Most encrypted data is only useful for a short period. This may be a few days for a terrorist bomb plot or a few years for top secret aircraft design. Virtually no secret is likely to be worth anything in 100 years.
If the effort to crack the encryption exceeds the potential value of the data then it is automatically secure. This is regardless of the actual strength of the algorithm. The CIA isn't going to spend 20 years and billions of dollars to see if there is some porn hidden on John Does's laptop.