33 votes

This encryption kickstarter could be the game-changer for privacy. Decentralized, works with any email.

So my team and I are about to launch a Kickstarter that we believe will be a game-changer for securing private communications. But before we launch I want to be sure I've got the right message. That's where I'm hoping the great minds of DP can help (or don't, I'm not a cop).

It's for an encryption software we're calling Privus (latin for "One's own" or "Privacy"). Basically it provides absolute security and secrecy for your communications.

What sets it apart from anything out there (and what we're seeking 2 patents for) is that you can use it with ANY email service and any device.

It uses encryption based on a principal called One Time Pad, which is the only encryption that's never been cracked.

We're planning to launch the Kickstarter in a couple of days. We're trying to raise about $38k to finish development of features for instant messaging, and texting. We even have features for forums. The email side of things is pretty much ready to go.

Here is the preview page for the Privus Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/857935876/175768761?tok...

So take a look and give me your best shot. I need to make this rock-solid before we go live.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Huge world-wide security bug emphasizes importance of Privus


Two days ago it was revealed there is a huge bug in OpenSSL named "Heartbleed". What this means is people who thought they were storing and transmitting sensitive data securely were not actually doing so.

We've never had confidence in SSL as a meaningful source of encryption and that's why we only rely on it for our "open" (Privus Level 1) communications. This also brings into question how meaningful Google's recent announcement about moving to HTTPS really is.

This is just one more reason why additional AES (Privus Level 2), RSA (Privus Level 3), and OTP (Privus Level 4) encryption on the client-side are so important for everyone.

Another reason for Privus: "Google has NSA-proofed your Gmail!"

Update #3 has been posted!


Another reason for Privus: "Google has NSA-proofed your Gmail!"

Last week, Google (through articles on PCMag, CNN and several major news sites) made big waves by announcing it was "beefing up the security of Gmail to make mass surveillance of its customers' email nearly impossible" by securing how users connect to its servers.



We were so concerned about the overstated “beefiness” of Gmail's new security that we reached out to CNN and PCMag to correct them on some very serious myths about encryption that they were perpetuating with this article. We want to share our thoughts because helping you understanding how your Privus service will work is one of our goals.

CNN and PCMag's original headlines were "Goggle has NSA-proofed your Gmail," and states, "Google just beefed up the security of Gmail to make mass surveillance of its customers' email nearly impossible."

There are maybe 4 or 5 organizations on the planet that can perform unauthorized (without the permission of the user) “mass surveillance“. Well over 98% of the security threats come from everywhere else. While SSL will keep out most of that 98%, it’s WIDELY speculated that SSL has been penetrated by the NSA and its partners. So while SSL beats 98% of the threats – and Google can can use a phrase like “nearly impossible," none of those threats are associated with “mass surveillance”.

Google is actually part of the problem! They are one of the 4 or 5 organizations that CAN and ARE performing unauthorized mass surveillance!

CNN and PC Mag are dangerously toying with the 4th amendment here. The “sound bite” citizen will read the headline and go to work the next day and tell all the other “sound bite” citizens – oh Google is NSA proof now.

The article goes on to say, "to accomplish the feat, Google secured how you connect to its servers... using a secure communications protocol called HTTPS".

First, SSL is not a feat. It was invented by Netscape (who?) in 1995 and every "ma and pa” e-commerce site has been using it for the last 19 years. Google was founded in 1998 and they’re just now performing this great feat.

Then contrary to the headline, the CNN article states, "It's not quite NSA-proof, but it's close." This statement is about as comforting as having your teenager come home and say “Well Dad, I’m not quite a virgin, but I’m close.” With the NSA, there isn’t a gradient of attacks, they want everything. We either stop them or we don't.

We could go on, but I think the point is made. We are genuinely concerned about the misuse of power that has been demonstrated by some of the very organizations that were created to “protect” our way of life, and this is why we have created Privus.

There is only one proven technology capable of stopping mass surveillance - One Time Pad.

Privus is the only company that has made One Time Pad simple to use and capable of working with the email services you already use, including Gmail!

It's also worth noting: When Privus launches, it will offer 4 levels of encryption - OTP being the top offering. SSL is the first level of the 4.

P.S., After reaching out to CNN and PCMag, they quickly changed the headlines to "Google tries to NSA-proof Gmail" and "Google Encrypts All Gmail Messages After NSA Snooping", respectively.

A few folks from DP have

A few folks from DP have joined the project as backers. Thanks so much guys! :)

Whew... today has been a

Whew... today has been a flurry of activity.

After going live 36 hours ago, Privus is now 7% funded. That may not seem like much, but that's huge number for momentum. If that trend continues, the project could be funded in about 3/4 the time we were expecting.

Privus' first write-up was a feature on an obscure blog called SearchIndia. http://www.searchindia.com/2014/03/11/why-privus-because-pow...

It had some good praise, but also drew some hasty conclusions. I've contacted them to hopefully help clarify. Even with a couple of inaccuracies, it was exciting to see someone taking enough interest in the project to create a blog post.

Spent a bit of time working the twitter channels. I'm skeptical how productive those will end up being. Nearly all of the feedback has been very positive and enthusiastic.

Also, I got the Kickstarter intro video uploaded to Youtube.

We also posted the project's first update.

Edward Snowden’s Broadcast Described the Need for Privus

We were thrilled to hear that the day we launched Privus on Kickstarter, the first 15 minutes of Edward Snowden's first public interview, was devoted almost exclusively to the need for encrypted communications services that both provide true security – and are so simple to use, they are "invisible" to the user.

That’s what Privus does!

Tomorrow I'd like to get the start of the FAQ posted to the project page. A lot what is being put into that FAQ is directly related to the discussions we've had in this thread.

So a big THANK YOU to those that came with great questions and contributed to the discussion.

It was amazing for the Privus

It was amazing for the Privus team to watch the Edward Snowden Q&A at SWSX today. If you haven't watched it, it's absolutely worth the watch.


Here's one of our favorite quotes:

“[Consumers] have to choose between a service that’s easy to use and reliable and polished, or a tool that is highly secure and impossible for the average person to use. That reflects the fact that the services that are developed by large companies with the resources to put 100 developers on the user interface – those are the ones that are not optimized for security.

And the tools that are designed with security as the first goal, are typically made by independent developers and activists and hobbyists – and they’re typically tools made by geeks for geeks. And so what that means is the regular users have to pick. They have to pick between a service they cannot figure out how to use [but offers true security] or a service that… works out of the box. [but offers little true security]”

And we're live!

And we're live!


Seems very appropriate that we launch on the day Edward Snowden said the world needs a simple solution to encryption that uses the tools we already use (like Gmail and Facebook).

Full video of his Q&A here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPrDqoaHHSY

Many thanks to you guys for all the great feedback! We spent a good part of the weekend looking at improvements and what we could release in updates during the campaign to make it easier for people to understand.

Can I install Privus on to an existing Ironkey?

Can I install Privus on to an existing Ironkey?

Yes! You can install Privus

Yes! You can install Privus to any storage device. But if you already have an IronKey then you'll pretty much have the ultimate set-up.

'Send' vs 'Encrypt' buttons

All that’s left is to click the “Send” button.

With Privus, the only difference is you have two buttons to choose from – one that sends your message in the open and one that sends it encrypted. That’s it!

I'm not sure I understand... is there some sort of browser plugin component to Privus? How are you integrating your own UI with gmail, yahoo, etc?

Also what about gmail's 'auto-save draft' feature, where even partially composed, unsent messages are being sent out over the wire?


You'll use a browser GUI

You'll use a browser GUI email interface. It's very similar to the way Gmail and how email is set up on your phone. You'll just open Privus and link up your email account.

We do have an auto-save draft feature in the backlog, but this will not send any unecrypted content "over the wire" since that would defeat the purpose. Any drafts would be saved client-side.

Electronic one-time pad?

What makes OTP secure is that a *physical* pad of paper is kept in the possession of one party, and when a page is used once it is never used again. The other party has an identical pad. As long as the physical pads are kept secure and used properly, it's provably unbreakable. But the communication is only as secure as the security you use to protect the two pads.

In an electronic version of it the system is only going to be as secure as whatever technology you use to transmit the one-time pad. If you use AES to transmit a one-time pad, and then use the one-time pad to encrypt a message, the system is only as secure as AES. The one-time pad doesn't add any security. How do you get around this?

Also, is it going to be open source? If not how do you plan to convince a potential customer, who is likely to be someone who cares a great deal about privacy and security and has a healthy kind of paranoia about such things, to trust your company?

Great questions! In an

Great questions!

In an electronic version of OTP the system is only going to be as secure as whatever technology you use to transmit the one-time pad. If you use AES to transmit a one-time pad, and then use the one-time pad to encrypt a message, the system is only as secure as AES. The one-time pad doesn't add any security. How do you get around this?

We have 4 levels of encryption. From the least to the most secure, they are:

1. Standard SSL

2. Challenge/Response AES/SSL

3. RSA/AES/SSL (that’s been enhanced by OTP)


What’s more, our interface provides a seamless “rules-based” system that automatically applies these different levels of encryption for you, based on preferences you choose as the user.

We did this because symmetrical encryption methods like OTP will never be as convenient to set up as asymmetrical methods like RSA. (NOTE: As the user, your experience sending and receiving OTP-encrypted emails, day-in and day-out, is not any more complicated than using Gmail. I’d be happy to send you the details if you’re interested, but I didn’t want to bury you in “the weeds” without asking you first.)

Even though setting up OTP is a bit more involved than setting up RSA, we’ve leveraged technology to make it far simpler than it’s ever been.

We use a crypto-grade random number generator that can produce extremely large OTPs in a very short period of time. (For example, we can create a 100MB long key segment in under 90 seconds). With storage devices being so inexpensive, a user can afford to store OTPs with enough key data to last for years. This is especially true since they have the option of three other methods of encryption, which potentially reduces the usage of OTP keys when they’re not needed.

Most importantly, we DO NOT compromise the OTP protocol by sending it over the web, because like you said – what’s the point? We might as well use RSA. Consequently, traditional offline key-sharing is necessary. For contacts you communicate with that are in close proximity, that’s never been a problem. (especially since with our system, you only have to do it once every 4 to 5 years.

For long distance contacts, that’s where a hardened USB device like our IronKey solution comes in. You can send an IronKey USB drive (which we will provide for free) halfway around the world in 72 hours, for less than $75. And you’ll be 100% sure it was not tampered with when it arrives.

Taking 20 to 30 minutes to create a OTP that will last 4 to 5 years (or longer) is a small price to pay for those individuals who want access to the kind of absolute security only OTP encryption can provide.

Also, is it going to be open source? If not how do you plan to convince a potential customer, who is likely to be someone who cares a great deal about privacy and security and has a healthy kind of paranoia about such things, to trust your company?

To be totally candid, we really haven’t given open source much consideration – largely because the only part of our application that paranoid [your word :) ] users would worry about is the integrity of the encryption, not the underlying code for an email interface. And our OTP engine is completely transparent.

As you probably know, true OTP uses an amazingly simple modular addition function. We provide an “audit window” that allows you to see everything. You see your “source” text. You see your key segment. You see your ciphertext – and with modular addition, you can actually confirm the translation with a simple spreadsheet or even paper and pencil.

We came into this with the a guiding premise that no one should have to trust us or anyone else. That’s what’s lead to many of the problems where seeing in the industry today. So we’ve deliberately developed an implementation that makes it so the user has to trust no one along the communications chain. I hope that satisfies the community. I guess we’ll see.

Again, great questions!


That make sense about physical transmission of the OTP, although the OTP has to be as long as the total amount of email you send so if you're sending large attachments (pictures, video, scanned documents, apps, etc) you could easily burn through gigabytes of OTP data.

Thanks for the reply!

Sorry for the delay

Sorry for the delay responding to your questions. I'm getting an answer to these from the lead developer and will have something for you shortly. Thanks for taking a look!

Simple keylogger

Will completely break this system by simply obtaining passwords and data before they encrypted.

And Windows is a one huge security hole anyway.

Standard procedure is to use an air-gap - computer that is physically disconnected from the network, with all wireless cards (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) physically removed. This computer is used to encrypt and decrypt data, and unencrypted data never leaves air-gap computer.
Also you need to keep control on this computer, so it will not be tampered with, while you are away from it.

Then you can start talking about security.

Hey yk256, let me clear up a

Hey yk256, let me clear up a few things for you...

Point #1 - A simple keylogger will completely break this system by simply obtaining passwords and data before they encrypted.

No, a simple keylogger would be detected by any robust anti-keylogger malware application – which anyone who is serious about security would use. Keylogger malware isn’t any different from any other type of malware. If you allow your system to be compromised, all bets are off.

Whether you do or don’t have malware on your system really isn’t the point. Any IT Security Engineer worth his salt will tell you that you always assume you’re system infected. The question is whether you’re protected?

In other words, can a dormant virus, become active and attack before your system can shut it down. Obviously, computer systems can and are being protected – or our entire digital society would have long since been crashed by cyber-terrorists.

Point #2 - Windows is a one huge security hole anyway.

I certainly won’t argue that a naked installation of Windows is nowhere nearly as secure as Unix. But by the same token, Windows 8 is has certainly made some huge internal improvements – and there are dozens, if not hundreds of third-party solutions that can make Windows solid.

Here again, look at the evidence. Businesses all over the globe use Windows. If they were being hacked regularity because the OS couldn’t be sufficiently hardened, Microsoft would be out of business, and Bill Gates would be working for some guy who figured out how to make Unix user-friendly enough for the average consumer.

If you think Apple is any better, read this article http://gizmodo.com/why-apples-huge-security-flaw-is-so-scary... . All operating systems are vulnerable if they are not properly hardened.

Point #3 - Standard procedure is to use an air-gap - computer that is physically disconnected from the network, with all wireless cards (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) physically removed. This computer is used to encrypt and decrypt data, and unencrypted data never leaves air-gap computer.

Sorry, but there is no such thing as a “Standard Procedure” when it comes to “air-gap” systems. We’ve seen applications ranging from hobby systems belonging to nerds that just want to out-nerd their nerd friends – to airborne modems used on military drones.

“Air-gap” isn’t just one thing. You could say that our solution has an “air-gap-like” component to it, because we separate the critical data from the machine and all the processing is only done client-side – so as you said “unencrypted data never leaves the computer.”

And if you use our Privus/IronKey solution, your data is isolated as securely as it can be. (Every battle tank in Iraq and Afghanistan has an IronKey USB drive in it. I haven’t heard of any cases where our tanks have been hacked and started shooting each other.)

In truth “air-gap” is an arcane term that was used before we had wireless technology. They’ve already proven that computers that are completely “air-gap-ed” (as you described it) have transmitted data acoustically across 60 feet at 20 bits per second through the computers’ built-in speakers and mics.

Air-gap systems are not invulnerable. They are only as good as the scrutiny you apply to them. That military drone system we mentioned above was infected by a simple “text” file.

Using “air-gap” computers in an “open” communications system is completely unrealistic.

“(Air-gap) is one of the most drastic, inconvenient, and difficult-to-maintain computer security measures out there.” – Josephine Wolff, Ph.D. candidate, MIT, Published - Dec 3, 2013.

The cost alone would put it outside of most people’s reach – not to mention the technical expertise it requires.

Point #4 - Also you need to keep control on this computer, so it will not be tampered with, while you are away from it.

I won’t argue with you there. Except to say that if you have the malware protection I mentioned above, the hardware is probably less critical these days than controlling the key data.

Thanks for the challenge. You obviously know a lot more about security than the average user. I hope you took the exchange as coming from a “sporting gentleman”. I did.

Not that simple

#1 - keyloggers do not advertise their existence. They do not disrupt your system, they simply send some information away.
"...our entire digital society would have long since been crashed..." does not apply to keyloggers, or any other non-destructive, information-gathering software.

#2 - If your customer is experienced enough to harden their systems, they can use PGP, and it would be good enough for practical purposes.
Your advertisement is "simple to use system, integrated with gmail."

Unsaid assumption is that user do not have to be experienced to use your system.

I can hardly see popular system configuration like IE/Chrome + gmail + (any encryption on the same computer) as a secure communication system.

#3 - Airborne modems are not air-gap systems. Air-gap system has NO network connection at all. And you do periodical checks to make sure that no network connection is being added to your system without your knowledge.

Your system has no relation to air-gap concept. You separate encryption procedure, but non-encrypted data, password, etc. are still in the computer connected to the network. That's it.

I seriously doubt battle tanks are connected to the internet all the time.

Cost of air-gap is one additional computer ($400) + few USB drives + little knowledge + inconvenience.
Benefit - it is really hard to put a malware in it, and get any data out of it, without owner's consent.

And yes, you may need to physically remove microphone, camera and speaker to be thorough. But if you think you are really on that level of interest to someone with resources, you are either paranoid, or should worry of being followed and bugged. Either way securing computer communications will not help much.

Obviously every system is vulnerable, question is what is the cost of attack vs. the cost of defensive measures.

#4 How about keylogger in the BIOS? Hidden partition? Etc.


5) I can believe that YOUR part of the computer system is perfectly secure. It can be done, if you have knowledge, time and resources. It does not mean that the complete system is secure. Presentation on kickstarter may give customer false sense of security which is worse than no sense of security.

6) Of course. It is a knowledge exchange, nothing more, nothing less :)

May I recommend a bitcoin fundraiser at the same time?

Just officially launched it today. Here's what it looks like:


It relies on Wordpress and Coinbase. Want a copy?

Get your preps together! Learn historic food storage and preservation methods and the science that makes them work now, start saving money and the future

I'm not opposed to doing a

I'm not opposed to doing a bitcoin fundraiser. But first and foremost, all our resources are on the Kickstarter.

Perhaps once we hit our funding goal it will free up some resources to focus attention on a bitcoin one.

Thank you for the suggestion.

Resources? Funding goal?

This helps you gain resources and reach your funding goal, it's not what you do once you gain them. Door remains open.

Get your preps together! Learn historic food storage and preservation methods and the science that makes them work now, start saving money and the future

Oh yes, I agree. It's just a

Oh yes, I agree. It's just a matter of putting manpower towards it. We're probably launching the Kickstarter this afternoon, so all our time and people are focused towards that goal.

What I mean by funding goal, is that if we don't hit the $37,500 goal on Kickstarter we get nothing. But once we hit that magic number we can breathe easier and start putting time and people towards other avenues like bitcoin.

Impressive, a couple of questions

1. Does this software also function as a logon password manager?
2. What level/effort in the software would be required to support HIPAA protected emails? I'm specifically thinking of doctor communications to patient.

Hi RightsOnRamp! Thank you

Hi RightsOnRamp! Thank you for taking a look.

To answer you questions:
1) Our first release will include the email service, soon to be followed by Instant Messaging and Forums. Later releases are planned for file and password management systems.

By the way, for those supporters that select our Privus with IronKey option, this provides a password manager immediately.

2) The system was actually created with HIPAA in mind. What I mean by that is, people who are protecting their own information are usually more willing to spend time jumping through technical hoops than are healthcare providers that need to manage the costs of regulatory compliance. So we had to make sure our solution didn’t add any time to the normal emailing process.

Our system provides 3 different solutions that healthcare providers, banks, insurers, mortgage companies and other regulated businesses can use that do not require any additional processing from the user.

However, we’re also developing a module specifically for the healthcare industry that would support HIPAA-compliant file transfers between physicians, clinics, labs, imaging centers and other facilities. This will be EHR compatible and will eliminate the need for a VPN or other secured network.

In addition, it will support doctor/patient email by associating either a public encryption-key or a “Patient ID”, (which can be in any format you use in your paper or EHR system) with the patent’s email address.

The public-key solution, asks the patient to login to “your” system. The “patient ID” solution doesn’t require a login. Instead they enter their ID to read their emails.

In both solutions the healthcare provider does nothing differently from if they were sending a regular email – no codes, no keys, no cutting and pasting. Just compose and send like you always have.

TwelveOhOne's picture

A couple pointers

Although I'm not sure what the author's answer would be, I can point you in a few directions.

1. Logon password managers abound. See market leader OneSign; Caradigm; Sentillion; Firefox (and plugins: LastPass; Saved Password Editor; Remember Passwords; etc).

2. For "in-house" communications in a hospital, see Cortext. I haven't seen a doctor-to-patient solution, and quick research showed that if the patient initiated the communication over regular email, the doctor can respond.

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

Comments require registration

Registration does not recognize hotmail e-mail address.

Where is FAQ: “What are the Mechanics of OTP that make it uncrackable."?

If it is uncrackable, so called, then an individual who can be called A has information.



An example of information could be a simple arrangement of binary code stored onto a storing device such as a memory card.

I am trying to think this out, and it is not easy.

Perhaps I am almost the dumbest tool in the shed.

Perhaps I am the one, dumbest, tool.

How about a significant, accurate, measure of value placed upon this theoretical arrangement of binary code stored onto this physical device where the code exists in fact?

How about competitive examples of a few theoretical code arrangements?

How about 10?

I like the number 10.

Assassination Market Lottery Ticket Trading
A transfer of the arrangement of code from peer to peer seeking a specific event to take place sometime in the future based upon that "vote" or that "pledge" contained within the arrangement of code.

Betty talks trash about Wilma to Barny not wanting Fred to find out because we all know that Fred will tell Wilma and all hell will break loose.

The gang running the International Monetary FUND need to know who owes the National Debt so as then to collect stuff from those people.

The Formula for making sandstone into motor fuel is invented by A, so A, an individual, does not want to forget this specific formula, or have this formula change from the original one that actually works.

A, the same individual, or B, another individual, invents a new arrangement of code, tried, tried again, on scaled networks, and in each case so far as tried, small, medium, and large, each network where this arrangement of code is connected to the network, every time so far, the entire network is corrupted, altered, and no longer usable without wiping out all the memory storage devices, and then reprogramming each device connected to the network independently.

A, an individual, has 100 items for sale, each item is intended to be shipped to other people, not A, any other one, in exchange for a secure measure of purchasing power that is enough power to satisfy A, and inspire A, to send the item to the 100 people who are not A.

A, an individual, found out how to connect to the so called internet, and through this connection, in a secure location, the connection manages to transfer data out of many places, where those places is believed to be secure places, but those places are not secure, and this information ends up being a very small deduction from many places, and at the same time all those small deductions flow into one FUND. A, an individual, hires other people to help run the false security business. They all share the loot before they are caught. So far the game remains to be well hidden.

A, an individual, figures out how to cure cancer with a few ingredients found in an average location on earth where average life exists, and that information is stored, for now, in a location for safe keeping.

A, an individual, figures out how to create a viral disease much worse than cancer, and so far every contact to life with this invention, inside a secure location where robots assemble the individual parts of the viral disease, a genetic combination of unique quality, ends. Life ends, except this remaining form of life, in every case, so far, when any life other than this new life comes in contact with one life. This new life form consumes all other life forms so far, in every case, so far, in this secure location that exists securely. That formula is stored on a device that can be connected to every other life form too.

In case Number 9 above gets out, there happens to be a formula that works as an antidote for number 9 above. The antidote has to be assembled, and connected to each life form in case Number 9 starts flowing, or any life not connected to the antidote ends miserably. Death by number 9, it turns out, is a miserable death. The antidote is held in a secure location.

I'd like to return to this Topic and work on each competitive scenario offered above, all 10, to see how this encryption concept works in our times and our places.

The concept is not as simple as it may appear at first - but I'm not too bright.


Regarding your first question

Regarding your first question “Where is FAQ: What are the Mechanics of OTP that make it uncrackable.?”, KickStarter doesn’t allow us to post FAQ’s until the campaign goes live. Look for it as soon as we launch the campaign.

As for everything else you wrote, I don't understand what you're trying to ask. I showed your message to 6 other people and they didn't understand it either. Would you mind clarifying?

No problem

Take Example 2 offered (or take any other example offered, just not both at the same time)

Betty talks trash about Wilma to Barny not wanting Fred to find out because we all know that Fred will tell Wilma and all hell will break loose.

Betty composes the message (talking trash about Wilma):

Wilma is a Royal Bitch.

Betty can keep that trash talk private, locked up in her mind, never allowing anyone else to see that arrangement of symbols in that order.

Betty wants Barny to receive that message but Betty is fearful about having that message find its way to the wrong person once that message leaves the safe place that that message is stored (in the brain of Betty) and in that example scenario there is an obvious demand for something.


I can stop here so as to allow the message intended reach the intended receiver of the message without the message being scrambled up in between the sender and the receiver of the message - before moving onto another message exchange.

Am I still speaking in code?


Why would you even post something like this?

Just ask the guy a direct question. I have a MS focused on Network Engineering and had to read your silly question a couple of times. Why is this something out of a basic undergrad textbook PKI encryption problem that you pulled out?

Tu ne cede malis.

2014 Liberty Candidate Webpage:

2014 Liberty Candidate Thread:

I want to know.

I did not intend to antagonize anyone.

If you can't answer questions asked, then why would you even post something like this?

If I want to know precisely how encryption works, then I have to establish time and place where an example of encryption works in that time, and in that place, so as to then know how encryption works in that time, and in that place, one step at a time.

Here is time and place where encryption is demanded.

Here next is time and place where encryption is supplied to meet the demand for it.

The form that encryption takes arrives in time and place at a time and a place.

I listed 10 possible scenarios whereby anyone can pick up the concept and follow along with the question, and provide the answer to the question.

Here in time and place there is no encryption, this time, this place, then, arriving in a place at a time is a form of encryption, and then, in that time, in that place, encryption is used in the form it exists in the place it is used, at the time it is used one step at a time.

If you can't read English, then how do you expect someone else to know what you know about whatever it is you know?

Is English encrypted?


Great addition to my project

I have been working on an adaptable internet application framework for the past few years. My progress on this has been very slow due to my current business (spinoflex.com), but I got a patent on this concept - details here: http://www.google.com/patents/US8515831

Project goal is to make the internet a lot more useful to common people by making it people centric, shifting away from the current problem centric approach. Security is important for my project.

I like your video presentation and see a great need for such a tool. I have been paying special attention to software projects within the DP community.

I will be glad to be a backer.