Back to Blog
Encryptstick 1286/22/2023 ![]() ![]() ![]() Stick with standards going against the grain doesn't pay in this field. Trying to ad hoc the implementation of a non-standard, overly-complex, and largely-unknown is the most counterproductive and fruitless risk one could take, and one that I can't see any justification for, in an arena where cryptography falls apart because of the implementation, not the mathematics. As such, deploying his methodologies in a real-world setting seems rather antithetical to state-of-the-art best practice. Röellgen nearly eight years ago, and while I feel he means well, I'm not, in the slightest bit, convinced that he possesses the cryptographic competence required to design cryptographic primitives. The entire presentation of his methodologies lacks in both sense and convention. On the contrary, there isn't such a paper, and you'll be hard-pressed to find any academic papers on cryptography by Mr. This is the way cryptographers propose new cryptographic primitives, after all. Röellgen is touted as "one of the foremost experts in the field of cryptography," along with the boast that his polymorphic offering is the "world's strongest encryption algorithm," you'd think there'd be an academic paper that clearly states, with mathematical proofs, its resistance to specific cryptanalytical attacks. It's in one's best interest to shy away from this product, as it incorporates Bernd Röellgen's proprietary polymorphic encryption.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |