Marv,

> The most dangerous encryption is the encryption which you believe in -
> that is not secure. The WW2 Enigma is a prime example. The Germans

would

> have been better off not using any encryption -- their communications
> would have been more efficient and they would have protected their

plans

> better.

I don't think this analogy is correct.

The problem is that the Allies managed to get a hold of a couple of the
Enigma "machines" -- akin to getting a hold of the key in modern
encryption systems.

The Enigma cipher would require *a modern computer* 2+ years of CPU time
in order to crack.

There is no such thing as a foolproof encryption approach; all require
some form of key.

So, in the end, the problem comes down to 2 factors:

- how access to the key is restricted
- how long it could take for the encryption to be broken.


Sean