## Comments and Opinions

* "It's not what you say, but how you say it. Please keep it civil."
* - Wandee Thaweetham

We will publish your emails here (if you agree) and the reply we gave and hope that this will get a discussion started. As stated above, keep your comments civil as long as you reply to a comment made by a reader. We have grown a thick skin during the time we discussed the OTP and the selection of your words can be stronger when addressing our comments or the previous web pages. Thanks.

Our contact email:wandeethaweetham@gmail.com

**Natanael_L - Moderator at reddit.com**

Comment 1:

Looking at the OTP that doesn't seem a problem, because we know it will not reveal one solution to a cipher but all possible solutions. If our system doesn't apply to the rules which are required of an OTP, it demands to show a mathematical or logical proof that the cipher characters in our system don't hold the probability of 1/26 (English alphabet) or 1/256 (the extended ASCII set).

_____________

_____________

_____________

From the PDF file we provide it should be clear that each plaintext character has its own mapped cipher character (like in the OTP each plaintext character has its own key character) and that this character has always a probability of 1/256 . So it doesn't matter if our message is a megabyte or ten megabytes, the length of the message isn't important but the fact that the cipher is of the same length.

_____________

The expression **one-time** refers to the process
the key is selected and the conditions applied to it; towards each message character (*the alphabet we use is of no consequence*) we add a key character that has
to be *truly random* not to be repeated in part or whole. That is the one-time part of the OTP; nothing more and nothing less and **truly random** is to be understood as
**non computable**. Looking at the structure we just have created it is plain obvious that the key on its own is of no use to friend or foe and that it requires additional steps
to ensure that a recipient can read a message we want to transmit, without having to send the plaintext (message) itself. Common view now tells us that this can only be
achieved by using modular arithmetic (*see our web pages or the PDF file*) and that this causes a problem because it creates a key distribution problem.
Bruce Schneier formulates the problem as follows: **What a one-time pad system does is take a difficult message security problem .... and turn it into a
just-as-difficult key distribution problem. It's a "solution" that doesn't scale well, doesn't lend itself to mass-market distribution, is singularly ill-suited to
computer networks, and just plain doesn't work.*) **
* Bruce Schneier*

*) We would like to thank Bruce for permitting us to quote from his publications.

_____________

### Page Selection

Copyright (c) 2014/2017 - Wandee Thaweetham, Chanthaburi, Thailand - Last update 10th January 2017