ADVERT: Secure communications

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
C12-GAMMA; a free/open-source E-mail security tool for BSD/Linux:

[ probably the most important cryptography software ever written;
  because it contains the CipherPacket source-code/algorithm ]

Re: ADVERT: Secure communications

C12-GAMMA is a finalised branch of Caesarion v12; a free software
product for the FreeBSD and Linux operating systems.

The software provides secure (E-mail) communications facilities;
communications secrecy, user-authentication and data-integrity

Re: ADVERT: Secure communications (06-07-31 10:40:57):

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, I didn't try it, but it has a few serious flaws, from what you say
about it in the "unique technological superiorities" list:

| The use of the L15 Stream Cipher which is a technological superiority
| in itself.

This is a claim, which is not proven in any way.  I couldn't find a
single review of the algorithm, nor did anyone talk about it.  By the
way, how could a random number generator based on ARC4 be secure at all?
How could it be even more secure than an LFSR-based generator?

| Innovative Cipher-Packet technique hides ciphertext in padding thus
| preventing cryptanalysis.

What does that mean, it "hides" ciphertext in padding?  And how does
that prevent cryptanalysis?

| E-mail is encrypted using the RSA public-key cryptosystem thus
| eliminating security risks from symmetric ciphers.

What security risks?  The security of RSA isn't even proven, and no
serious flaws have been found in AES or Twofish, or even Blowfish.  And
how about sending a 16 MB file via e-mail?  That would take hours to
encrypt with RSA.  There is actually a reason to use symmetric ciphers
with RSA.

| The provision of secret-public-key facilities caters for high security
| scenarios.


| Unorthodox (reversed) RSA encoding of data should provide a higher
| level of security relative to orthodox implementations.

First of all, RSA is no encoding.  Now what is "reversed RSA

| Digital signatures are encrypted thus eliminating security risks from
| cryptographic hash functions (most of which have recently discovered
| security issues).

The recent security issues found in hash algorithms can't be used to
attack them, when used properly.  Encrypting digital signatures,
however, is _not_ proper use, because signatures should help proving
that the message wasn't forged (and not only to the receiver).  How are
they encrypted anyway?  What about unencrypted signed-only messages?

| The software is supplied with a FreeBSD-4.11R /dev/[u]random
| replacement kit.

And that's more secure?  Does it use L15 again?


Re: ADVERT: Secure communications

On 10 Jun, 08:57, wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

[ And, once again, I'll post my commentary about this idiot: he's been
posting this cruft every month, for years now. ]

Oh, ghod, this idiot is back?

He's been doing this for years: the frontpage for his software lies
about the license, which he claims "may not be used for terrorism" but
in fact makes no restrictions on using it for any illegal purpose. It
just swears that it's not hte author's fault or problem. His tarball
is misnames (it doesn't match the name of hte directory it contains),

He somehow thinks it's going to replace PGP, but you have to go
digging through the source code and documentation unavailable at his
website to figure out what it actually *IS*. He then spends pages
talking about security issues which have nothing, in fact, to do with
his software. (Keystroke monitoring, CRT monitoring, etc.)

And the software has, accordiing to his own documentation not been
on Linux. So it's in fact off-charter for this group for him to be
spamvertising here.

Site Timeline