Kerckhoffs' Principle (obscurity vs public security policy)

[KissCool]

The reasoning behind Kerckhoffs' Principle is compelling. If the cryptographic algorithm must remain secret in order for the system to be secure, then the system is less secure. The system is less secure, because security is affected if the algorithm falls into enemy hands. It's harder to set up different communications nets, because it would be necessary to change algorithms as well as keys. The resultant system is more fragile, simply because there are more secrets that need to be kept.


Here (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0205.html) is a very interesting article about the Kerckhoffs principle. This principle is related to the obscurity vs public security policy moot which divide some security companies and open source projects in their conception of what is the more secure.
It's a good and intelligent argument.

[Noia]

Well, here's an Idea......Using a Notebook Cipher (A Letter exchanging Matrix)
then once the first one has benn implemented, simply compund the rest ontop of that one, in that way, every time you upgrade, the cipher which is being used to upgrade is useless without the old one as well, thus, after the first setup the system won't be cracked, even if people steal the latest notebook Matrecies, coz you would need ALL of the previous ones as well to decrypt the date :P am I making any sense?
If you want me to explain it better, PM me...

hmm.....Kerckhoffs didn't he do the theory of parallel circuit's?

any how...Merry X-mas

- Noia

EDIT: Never knew I typed that bad. :mad:

[KissCool]

I'm not absolutely sure it is the same person. But the theory of parallel circuits is really from a man called Kerckhoffs.
Probably the same.