<p dir="ltr"><a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/northboundnetworks/zodiac-fx-the-worlds-smallest-openflow-sdn-switch">https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/northboundnetworks/zodiac-fx-the-worlds-smallest-openflow-sdn-switch</a>  boom!</p>
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Mar 27, 2016, 10:27 PM James Knott <<a href="mailto:james.knott@rogers.com">james.knott@rogers.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 03/27/2016 10:15 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:<br>
> Good crypto protocols are very much designed to not be trivial to break<br>
> even with some known plain text.  It is a known obvious attack so they<br>
> are designed to protect against exactly that.<br>
<br>
Yep, they've been doing that for centuries.  With a polyalphabetic<br>
cipher, each time a letter occurs in the plain text, a different letter<br>
is used in the cipher text.  This makes it impossible to use the<br>
statistical methods used with monoalphabetic ciphers, where a plain text<br>
letter always has the same cipher text letter.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyalphabetic_cipher" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyalphabetic_cipher</a><br>
---<br>
Talk Mailing List<br>
<a href="mailto:talk@gtalug.org" target="_blank">talk@gtalug.org</a><br>
<a href="https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk</a><br>
</blockquote></div>