tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1604521668529955719.post6959931751222124789..comments2008-07-30T16:39:01.082+12:00Richard Schwartinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05999356523405056706aquarichy@gmail.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1604521668529955719.post-21552874448457859192008-07-30T16:39:00.000+12:002008-07-30T16:39:00.000+12:00Key generation can take a while, cipher text can frequently end up larger than the plain text equivalent, and the encryption and decryption require mathematical transformation of the data that would otherwise not be necessary.<BR/><BR/>Imagine if you're helping plot a rebellion against the Republic, or you're privately a controversial individual due to your beliefs or lifestyle and would be stoned to death if people just knew. First, you don't want anyone intercepting your communications, revealing your controversial and rebellious nature. But, what if the other end of your communications becomes compromised? It would be very bad if they could confirm that you are indeed the source of the messages. If the historical record of your dissidence could have been forged, you have a much better alibi. But somehow, I don't think Chancellor Palpatine will care. Alderon is so toast.Richardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05999356523405056706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1604521668529955719.post-59184470455000168982008-07-30T13:59:00.000+12:002008-07-30T13:59:00.000+12:00What sort of "performance penalties" are there? Slower load times?<BR/><BR/>The deniability feature does seem odd. It would seem to me that encryption is all about ensuring WYFSIWYS (what your friend sees is what you wrote) and avoiding peepers and forgers. If you're doing that right, then why deny? <BR/><BR/>But maybe my understanding is less-so even then yours.Livhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10719762880498214831noreply@blogger.com