perm filename PUTNAM[0,BGB] blob
sn#077639 filedate 1973-12-15 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ā VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 YAW:
C00004 ENDMK
Cā;
YAW:
I have read your PUT[1,YAW] file and I think the code cracker
premise can not support the privacy hypothesis in the last section
of you paper. Because:
1. Code cracking can decode the semantics of a computer program.
In my experience, a good programmer can indeed read
undocumented machine code (even from a compiler) and can eventually
figure out what the undocumented program is doing, although the
decoder can not retrieve a source notation of which he has never
heard. That is what is lost in compilation is syntactical rather than
semantic.
2. Crytographic privacy lies in the semantics.
As in cryptography, privacy is achieved because the code
cracker lacks the time to decode the message or has too short an
example of the code or has no access to examples of the code.
Theorems concerning a perfect private code have not been established;
and so I believe that you must leave the privacy of mind question as
open.