In the last two posts, I have endeavored to present empirical data. Pragmatically one may easily recognize that:
1. Encryption is being used to secure data.
2. Breaches have occurred.
3. Readable data was acquired by those who don’t have a right to the data.
4. Conclusion: Encryption is failing to properly secure data.
Chapter 1 – the Challenge
Math is beautiful – I was enjoying the challenge, the possibilities, the patterns. When all is said and done, math and science is basically about patterns that can be interpreted and reproduced.After a few weeks, and more paper than I had ever used for “home work”, I had distilled the patterns down to one, that worked for all prime numbers except for the lonely, even numbered - prime number of “2”.
If I had understood back then “why” prime numbers were important, I wouldn’t have wasted another moment on “the technicality” of included “2” in the output produced by my prime number generator. Perhaps I thought like a lawyer, or a strategist, but I couldn’t take a chance that, omitting “2”, might ruin my chance of winning the reward.I approached Mr. Taylor at school during lunch. As a prelude to my bottom line, I advised him that I had the prime number generator, then asked how I go about claiming the $100,000.
At first he smirked as though I was pulling his leg with a sarcastic prank, then as he realized that I “wanted the money”, he arranged for me to see Dr. Harold Atkinson, the head of the math department at the University of Windsor.
Fellow classmates C. Collins and D. Girard translated this Prime Number generator into “WATFIV”, using those good ole punch cards and a large main frame computer. The printout included a large number of prime numbers as an early, pragmatically driven test of this prime number generator. These printouts along with the mathematical representation of the generator were brought to Dr. Atkinson.