Dude, msauve's proposed methodology is indeed tragically flawed, and you clearly haven't read the balance of the posts in this thread. Why are you so resistant to refutation of bad crypto advice? Are you positioned to benefit from deterministic systems which are advertised as cryptographically sound?
You clearly have no idea whatsoever what a one-time pad is. Reference my other comments in this thread for additional hints as to why msauve's error is particularly egregious in this context. Alternately, stay ignorant. Your choice.
I'm sincerely apprehensive about potential outcomes associated with Google becoming a domain registrar, but I'm accepting reversal of the mod points I've expended thus far on this story to strenuously object to to the thoughtcrime-based insinuation made in the following excerpt:
There is no way to prove that Google won't give priority indexing to domains it registers.
This is the logical equivalent to a forward-looking conviction on the same premises as Glenn Beck Raped and Murdered a Young Girl in 1990.
Completely absent additional information, I'll give you another hint on why deterministic assignment is a very bad choice here, representing a practice in total opposition to OTP: curve fitting. Is this starting to make a little more sense now?
Why won't you accept a shipment of formal reference materials?
Are you being completely serious and saying that you don't recognize how the process described in the original post is anything but a one time pad?
You must want relevant books shipped to you as well. Unfortunately, you're a pile of shit AC, so you won't get anything for your troubles.
Thank you. I'll dispatch the shipment in a few hours in the care of "ultranova", provided I get a response back under that user account indicating confirmation of the destination address. I'll provide a post tracking reference here once the shipment is confirmed to be in transit.
Just start with entropy and work your way out from there.
Somehow, I don't think you'll take me up on my offer. To do so would be tantamount of an admission of ignorance on your part. I really don't think you have the nuts for it. All the same, I replied to your linked post.
You're still completely wrong. I'm willing to spend my own money to ship you hardcopy references that will help you better yourself, in the hope that you will stop dispensing the sort of horrid advice you're continuing to regurgitate here. Why aren't you willing to take me up on this offer? Are you unable to provide a shipping address of any sort?
To be clear, advice similar to the sort you administered in the post I originally replied to is an apt explanation for why we have the number of massive failures in cryptographic functionality in software these days. You have absolutely no business even beginning to comment on this subject. May I please ship you a few hardcopy references?
Please demonstrate how I'm wrong. You just became a personal project of mine.
The flow chart is a most thoroughly oversold piece of program documentation. -- Frederick Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"
