Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c, sci.crypt |
| Subject | Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... |
| Date | 2015-08-22 13:02 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87wpwn7cpj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <mnp683$pld$1@speranza.aioe.org> <mpgmfd$q02$1@speranza.aioe.org> <mr867b$o02$1@speranza.aioe.org> <8737zc88t8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <mr8oqi$re1$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes:
>> "Ben Bacarisse" wrote in message news:8737zc88t8.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
>
>>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes:
>
>> >> "Chris M. Thomasson" wrote in message
>> >> news:mpgmfd$q02$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> >
>> >> FWIW, here is the latest version that can encrypt any file:
>> >
>> >> http://pastebin.com/rQRXU5Mb
>>
>> > > Quick question: Has anybody tried to compile this?
>
>> No, but I did just now since you asked...
>
>> > If so, how did it go?
>
>> Not bad. A lot of conversion warnings (I use -Wconversion on all new
>> code just to get the lie of the land) but they may well be fine.
>
> I think they are okay.
>
>
>> A warning about unused parameter (margs) and one about a missing
>> initialiser for bufsz in struct ffe_buf. Only that last one worried me.
>
> I am not seeing those warnings. The unused parameter (margs)
> almost has to be in the (ffe_encrypt_first_pass) and
> (ffe_encrypt_second_pass) functions. As for the last one, well
> could you please provide me with a line number?
Line 588. I'd add a 0 just to clear it up:
struct ffe_buf ebuf = { { '\0' }, 0 };
In fact, I might write it
struct ffe_buf ebuf = { "", 0 };
but that's hardly important.
<snip>
>> Running the result says
>
>> failed to parse!
>
>> Complete!
>
>> which indicates something is wrong. Do I need some hardware-specific
>> flags? This is gcc version 4.9.2 on an i7-3520M CPU.
>
> It will output “Complete!” regardless of how it exits, and this is
> a flaw. The failed to parse error means that it did not get enough
> command line arguments; it requires 7 of them.
<snip>
> Example for encryption:
>
> ffe C:\plaintext.txt C:\ciphertext.dat 0 -0.5 0.5 -0.5 0.5
>
> Does something like that work?
Yes. I can do an encrypt/decrypt cycle fine.
The program's a bit wordy but that's probably a Windows/Unix culture
clash.
<snip>
> Again, I am sorry for the sorry state of the crude, embryonic
> version of the code!
It's fine, but a one-line "usage" message would have enabled me to test
it right away.
--
Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-07 17:08 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-08 01:12 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-07 17:19 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-07 22:29 -0500
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-07 22:43 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-08 03:23 -0500
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 07:36 -0400
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-08 12:52 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-08 11:10 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-08 14:46 -0400
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-08 12:10 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-08 20:41 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-09 09:55 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-09 11:18 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 19:25 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-09 13:49 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 22:09 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-08 00:49 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-07 23:05 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-07 23:15 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-10 12:25 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-10 15:09 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-15 15:52 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-31 13:40 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-31 13:43 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-31 13:46 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-08-21 14:45 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-22 01:29 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-08-21 20:03 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-22 13:02 +0100
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-08-22 18:15 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-08-16 12:10 -0700
Re: Fun/Funny Fractal Encryption... luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 22:49 -0700
csiph-web