“Programming is one of the most difficult branches of applied mathematics. There is no other real mathematics, certainly not random number theory.” Edsger Dijkstra. “The validity of random number theory all comes down to whether you believe Archimedes or Pythagoras is the father of mathematics.” Michael Morrisroe
Scientists and engineers are careful people with well-established protocols. Error in scientific collection and correlation is rare. Anomalies in the random nature of their reported data almost invariably indicate interference with the scientific method.
Understanding Security Codes
Directly related to our discoveries in testing scientific publications was our application of the same theories to source code in programming. By simply studying the source code we were able to derive passwords. Despite billions of dollars spent on software security, no industry can do more than hope its security system works. As computing power has grown so has the number of security breaches.
The reason is that programming is reducible to a system of commands. No matter how complex, software is constructed around a series of statements that say “do this or do that.” A fair comparison may be made to a train timetable. Timetables describe which train is where at what time. Time tables must be accurate. A time table that lays out schedules that bear no relation to where trains will arrive and depart is useless.
At the bottom of our approach to deriving passwords from source code is the truism that to be useful software must be linked unambiguously to the relevant data and be connected by commands.
Software codes are breakable because they are intended for communication. The train timetable says that the train departs here and arrives there. The password is the equivalent to the timetable. It unlocks the program and allows people to use the program’s commands.
The primary problem with passwords is that they are necessary.
A password must always defeat the security system it is devised to protect. A password is like the key to the bank vault or the combination to a safe. To be of use, a software password must always open the lock. All bio-identification security techniques (fingerprints, face prints, retinal prints, etc.) must be translated in programming to a digital format. Computers only speak a two-word language: “0 and 1”
The NSA 20 Year Rule
In the 1970s, security firms that subscribed to the theory that codes based on 128 or 256-bit encryption could not be broken. Theoretically, the NSA computers would take at least 20 years to break these codes. The 20 Year Rule was based on 1970s computer speeds. That was then. But this is now.
Now the US Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) can generate a 1000 petaflops (1018 operations per second). Encryption currently thought safe, even the famous “one time pad” will be readable. The notoriously complex Bitcoin encryption is already under attack.
For example, a large Japanese trading company (at its request) had its passwords which were based on the circuitous Ringi system derived in less than two days.
Will quantum computers be a future solution for code makers? Unlike numbers, quanta are physical emanations that have existence in themselves. Numbers always relate to other things. Scientists at centers of learning have made substantial headway in designing quantum computers, but serious production is years away.
Our clients include Fortune 100 companies, public interest groups, and governmental agencies interested in scientific fraud and abuse. We also consult on security protocols. We do not offer packages. We offer bespoke solutions.
We accept assignments only after evaluating our suitability to the particular task, the value to the client, and our probability of success.
Our company is based in Canberra, Australia, adjacent to Australian National University. To reach us, please refer to our Contact Page.
“There are no rules for randomness, but we chart the markets, and we thereby predict—to our profit—what actually occurs.” The Illuminatus! Trilogy