??? 05/04/05 16:37 Read: times |
#92902 - unsecure? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
I said "and it is all for naught" because ANY encryption that is easy to overcome is worthless. Do you think this style of encryption is easy to overcome? Are you aware of any hole in the LPC9xx security bytes scheme? Or any other security problem with this scheme? Jan Waclawek |
Topic | Author | Date |
ISP-AES(or other tiny encryption)for LPC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
so it works? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re so it works? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
could it be | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
TEA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re could it be? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
double-xor | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
LPC935 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
TEA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Tea time! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
TEA time ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
More tea![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Please clarify requirements | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
what i want, Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Looks like you are set then | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
to Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: to Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Mode of operation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I underdstand now., thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
better done in hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
what about this? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
what are you making | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
theft has to be prevented | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
either or | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FM is just a "vehicle"... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
but a diesel | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
it's easy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
again, why | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
unsecure? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Individual sector security bits removal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
lockbits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Now i understand! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
same thing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
what am i making? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
be careful | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why GSM? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
for the xor method to work | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RC4 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RC4 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
A reminder | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
encryption | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
pgpi.org | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
ok thanks jez | 01/01/70 00:00 |