On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 6:03:23 PM UTC-6, joshj...@gmail.com wrote:
> for importing obfuscate do we just type in import obfuscate
> or import obfuscate 0.2.2
Oh boy. I had forgotten about this little community "gem"
dating back to 2010. And unfortunately for comrade Steven,
there is no way
for importing obfuscate do we just type in import obfuscate or import obfuscate
0.2.2
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:37 AM, Aahz wrote:
> In article ,
> geremy condra wrote:
>>On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
Steven D'Aprano writes:
>
> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically stron
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 03:00:50 +, geremy condra wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>>
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> DISCLAIMER: obfuscat
In article ,
geremy condra wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>> Steven D'Aprano writes:
DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
be used where high security is re
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 03:00:50 +, geremy condra wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>
>>> Steven D'Aprano writes:
DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
be used whe
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
>>> be used where high security is required.
>>
>> Certainly no one should never u
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:34:17 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
>> be used where high security is required.
>
> Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high
> security. Use at least
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not be
> used where high security is required.
Certainly no one should never use obfuscate's rot13 function for high
security. Use at least double-rot13 instead, or maybe even quadruple
rot13 ;-).
--
htt
I am pleased to announce the first stable release of obfuscate,
version 0.2.2.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/
obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
This is a maintenance release of back-end and API ch
I am pleased to announce the beta release of obfuscate 0.2.2b.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/
The beta release does not contain any new functionality from the previous
version, but includes bug fixes and many new tests.
obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
Paul Rubin wrote:
Mark Lawrence writes:
The predecessor of the Enigma was cracked by Polish scientists years
before WW2 started
I believe that all of Enigma was eventually cracked cos of two major
flaws.
I think it never would have been cracked if it hadn't been cracked
(whether by the B
in 144460 20100212 103319 Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote:
>Bob Martin wrote:
>> in 16 20100212 034121 Paul Rubin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer
>>> That was almost at the end of the war though.
>>>
>>
>> Colossus was working by the end of 1943 - the year tha
Bob Martin wrote:
in 16 20100212 034121 Paul Rubin wrote:
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer
That was almost at the end of the war though.
Colossus was working by the end of 1943 - the year that the Americans first
dropped
bombs on Germany ;-)
sept 1939 -
Mark Lawrence writes:
>> The predecessor of the Enigma was cracked by Polish scientists years
>> before WW2 started
> I believe that all of Enigma was eventually cracked cos of two major
> flaws.
I think it never would have been cracked if it hadn't been cracked
(whether by the Brits or the P
in 16 20100212 034121 Paul Rubin wrote:
>See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer
>That was almost at the end of the war though.
Colossus was working by the end of 1943 - the year that the Americans first
dropped
bombs on Germany ;-)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/
On 11/02/2010 11:32, Paul Rubin wrote:
Gregory Ewing writes:
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that the Germans
made some blunders in the way they used the Enigma that seriously
compromised its security. There was reportedly a branch of the German
forces that used their Enigmas
Christian Heimes wrote:
Gregory Ewing wrote:
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that
the Germans made some blunders in the way they used the
Enigma that seriously compromised its security. There
was reportedly a branch of the German forces that used
their Enigmas differently, avo
Paul Rubin wrote:
Gregory Ewing writes:
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that the Germans
made some blunders in the way they used the Enigma that seriously
compromised its security. There was reportedly a branch of the German
forces that used their Enigmas differently, avoidin
Paul Rubin wrote:
Gregory Ewing writes:
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that the Germans
made some blunders in the way they used the Enigma that seriously
compromised its security. There was reportedly a branch of the German
forces that used their Enigmas differently, avoidin
Christian Heimes wrote:
Gregory Ewing wrote:
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that the Germans
made some blunders in the way they used the Enigma that seriously
compromised its security. There was reportedly a branch of the
German forces that used their Enigmas differently, avo
Gregory Ewing writes:
> Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that the Germans
> made some blunders in the way they used the Enigma that seriously
> compromised its security. There was reportedly a branch of the German
> forces that used their Enigmas differently, avoiding those mista
Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
It also turned out that everybody mostly writes his/her
own obfuscation routine.
Hey, it gives you the additional advantage of obfuscation
by obscurity!
--
Greg
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the fact that
> the Germans made some blunders in the way they used the
> Enigma that seriously compromised its security. There
> was reportedly a branch of the German forces that used
> their Enigmas differently, avoiding those mista
Christian Heimes wrote:
A much, much stronger version of the
principles behind Vigenère was used in the German Enigma machine.
Because the algorithm was still not good enought some clever guy called
Turing and his team was able to crack the enigma.
Actually I gather it had a lot to do with the
On 10/02/2010 11:23, Simon Brunning wrote:
"Hello World!".encode('rot-13')
Not any more!
Python 3.1.1 (r311:74483, Aug 17 2009,
win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or
"Hello World!".encode('rot-13')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
LookupError: unknown encodin
On 10 February 2010 01:24, Ben Finney wrote:
> The classic example is rot-13 encryption of text in internet messages;
> it would be a failure of imagination to suggest there are not other,
> similar use cases.
That's built-in:
>>> "Hello World!".encode('rot-13')
'Uryyb Jbeyq!'
--
Cheers,
Simon
>> All algorithms in obfuscate are obsolete, insecure and only
>> interesting for people *that* want to get well educated in the history
>> of encryption.
>
> Not true. Another use case is suggested by the chosen name for the
> library: to obfuscate text against casual human reading, while not
> ma
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 02:03:47 +0100, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Stef Mientki wrote:
>> sorry I don't,
>> unless Python is only meant for the very well educated people in
>> encryption.
>
> All algorithms in obfuscate are obsolete, insecure and only interesting
> for people *that* want to get well e
Christian Heimes writes:
> All algorithms in obfuscate are obsolete, insecure and only
> interesting for people *that* want to get well educated in the history
> of encryption.
Not true. Another use case is suggested by the chosen name for the
library: to obfuscate text against casual human read
Stef Mientki wrote:
> sorry I don't,
> unless Python is only meant for the very well educated people in encryption.
All algorithms in obfuscate are obsolete, insecure and only interesting
for people *that* want to get well educated in the history of encryption.
> I neither did look at the code,
>
En Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:27:13 -0300, Stef Mientki
escribió:
On 10-02-2010 00:09, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
* David Robinow:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Simon Brunning
wrote:
On 9 February 2010 16:29, Robert Kern wrote:
On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
If the code base s
On Feb 9, 7:21 am, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <00fa27a3$0$15628$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
[..]
> No pig latin?
Wait a minute guys, Stevens a well known prankster and comic relief
clown around here, I think he's just shining us all on! ;o)
--
http://mail.python.o
On 10-02-2010 00:09, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
* David Robinow:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Simon Brunning
wrote:
On 9 February 2010 16:29, Robert Kern wrote:
On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
If the code base stabilizes in a production version after losing the
alphas and b
* David Robinow:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Simon Brunning wrote:
On 9 February 2010 16:29, Robert Kern wrote:
On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
If the code base stabilizes in a production version after losing the
alphas and betas they would be a great addition to the std
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Simon Brunning wrote:
> On 9 February 2010 16:29, Robert Kern wrote:
>> On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
>>> If the code base stabilizes in a production version after losing the
>>> alphas and betas they would be a great addition to the stdlib, I
>>
On 9 February 2010 16:29, Robert Kern wrote:
> On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
>> If the code base stabilizes in a production version after losing the
>> alphas and betas they would be a great addition to the stdlib, I
>> think.
>
> Why?
I agree. Why wait? Put them in the stdlib
In article ,
Robert Kern wrote:
>On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
>>>
>>> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
>>> algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
>>>
>>> DISCLAIMER: obfuscate is not cryptographically strong, and should not
On 2010-02-09 09:37 AM, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
obfu
> I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
>
> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
> algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
>
> obfuscate includes the following ciphers:
In article <00fa27a3$0$15628$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
>
> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
> algorithms suitable
Tim Chase wrote:
I prefer the strength of Triple ROT-13 for my obfuscation needs, but I
don't see it listed here.
That's old hat -- with the advent of 3GHz cpus and GPGPU, all the
experts are recommending quadruple ROT-128 nowadays.
--
Greg
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-li
I always though a double rot13 followed by a rot26 was the best?
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 9:19 PM, Tim Chase wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
>> algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
>>
>> obfuscate includes
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
obfuscate includes the following ciphers:
- Caesar, rot13, rot5, rot18, rot47
- atbash
- Playfair, Playfair6 and Playfair16
- Railfence (encryp
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
>
> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
> algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscat
Steven D'Aprano schrieb:
> I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
>
> obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
> algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
>
> obfuscate inc
I am pleased to announce the first public release of obfuscate 0.2.2a.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/obfuscate/0.2.2a
obfuscate is a pure-Python module providing classical encryption
algorithms suitable for obfuscating and unobfuscating text.
obfuscate includes the following ciphers:
- Caesar, r
47 matches
Mail list logo
