Suggested amendments RIP

[Dave Bird]

In article <2798.94T1231T3564216ghira@mistral.co.uk>, Adam Atkinson
<ghira@mistral.co.uk> writes
>> No, my definition included a cypher on the symbols but did not
>> include coded references
>That was what I thought, yes.

  Oh dear, I have had further email about this, and it is 
  very hard to express it more clearly.


 "Data is 'encrypted' if a holder has transformed the form or symbols
  expressing it, by a means which is (a) at least in part secret AND
  (b) at least in part external to himself, so that it is no longer 
  possible -- without first using the necessary secret reverse transf 
  ormation -- for him & others who understand the nature of the content 
  to read or process it.  Encryption includes both systematic cyphers
  and arbitrary code substitutions which satisfy (a) AND (b) above."

  [Transformations which don't include anything outside your own head
  or where the means of understanding are publicly known 
  would not be included]


 "Data is in, or restored to, 'intelligible form' if expressed in such 
  a way that the owner and others who understand the background can
  read or process the content as originally intended, i.e. it is not
 'encrypted' in the above sense."
     
 

-- 
   ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
        (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses