I have built my own encryption method which i believe is uncrackable, and it is 2...

The expression of an algorithm in a source code file can be copyrighted.

Such rights may allow the rights holder to prevent unauthorised reproduction of particular pieces of source code that embody an algorithm. However, such rights do not pertain to the algorithm itself and so copyright itself does not prevent others creating other expressions of the same algorithm in some other form, such as a different source code file.

just release it into the wild
use a vpn too l0l

investors dont like anime as much as us

okay, don't believe me, but in a hypothetical sense where would i go with this?
i got someone with a masters in cyber security who i trust to go other the maths and he confirms it

the source is my hard-drive, i haven't decided how i'm releasing it yet

so basically the file i've created which handles the encryption can be copyrighted, but that doesn't stop anyone from just coding it themselves in their own words using the same logic?

i don't want to stay poor forever, bro

As if. I'm not even going to tell you why I can easily tell that your post is a lie so that you can't make a better lie next post.
Just stop.

>Schneier's Law
>Anyone, from the most clueless amateur to the best cryptographer, can create an algorithm that he himself can't break.

Go talk to NIST or some high end university with actual mathematicians and computer scientists who can test your bullshit. I highly doubt you magically made some new encryption method not using ECC that is secure.

Just talk to a businessman/lawyer because clearly you have no idea

>so basically the file i've created which handles the encryption can be copyrighted, but that doesn't stop anyone from just coding it themselves in their own words using the same logic?

from what I understand, yes, the medium containing the code can be copyrighted, but anyone may use the algorithm freely, so long as its executed in their own words

don't be a faggot. publish it in academia, contribute to the good of society.

Attached: molly.jpg (704x440, 66K)

If you copyright it, nobody will use it.

If you have the chops to come up with novel encryption methods that rival industry standards you're not going to be poor for long whether or not you make money off your most recent invention

If you're in America it's going to be too much trouble to sell it.
>As of 2009, non-military cryptography exports from the U.S. are controlled by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security.[10] Some restrictions still exist, even for mass market products, particularly with regard to export to "rogue states" and terrorist organizations. Militarized encryption equipment, TEMPEST-approved electronics, custom cryptographic software, and even cryptographic consulting services still require an export license[10](pp. 6–7). Furthermore, encryption registration with the BIS is required for the export of "mass market encryption commodities, software and components with encryption exceeding 64 bits" (75 FR 36494). In addition, other items require a one-time review by, or notification to, BIS prior to export to most countries.[10] For instance, the BIS must be notified before open-source cryptographic software is made publicly available on the Internet, though no review is required.[11] Export regulations have been relaxed from pre-1996 standards, but are still complex.[10] Other countries, notably those participating in the Wassenaar Arrangement,[12] have similar restrictions.[13]

Arkham asylum

fair enough, i'd call bullshit if i read this as well

i can't find a crack but neither can anyone else
i finished the maths for the algorithm last year and spent the rest of my time trying to find the solution with a few colleagues, as it stands there isnt one

but do i need to be protected beforehand? if it is legit i don't want to miss out on it

i have a few lawyer contacts but not many who are proficient in laws of algorithm or technology, i just wanted to test the waters here first

and if the encryption itself can be compared to something in real life, can i patent that? as in patent the idea of using the inspiration of something to encrypt data? i can't really go into more detail than that

it's not that i want to hide the algorithm from others and sell it to the highest bidder, i want to be the one who takes it forward and introduces it to the market
i have a plan on how to do it, i just want to know how to stay protected first

if that happens after a few years i'll go full robin hood and release the whole thing, i just want to help my parents first

thankfully i am not

I know the correct answer to OP's question but I'm not going to tell him.

Attached: 1544384568777.jpg (249x249, 16K)

> patent the idea
No. You patent specific realization, so you need do distinguish key elements of your cypher and patent them.

> more secure than 256 bit AES while being just as fast

So, how fast are we talking here?

To make it short, you can't copyright your code in the way you imagined you could. But if you really did accomplish what you claim you have then you don't need to worry about being poor all your life cause there will be a lot of people offering you even more money to work for them. But I still really doubt that you did.

pretty fast

bartkasperolaw.com/can-you-patent-an-algorithm/

0.5 seconds to google.

Something tells me you're not the sort of person who generates game-changing ideas.

"more secure than" confirmed bullshit.

>can i patent that?
usually you can't patent an idea, but rather the execution and utilization of that idea in a produced invention. I am by no means an expert in patent law, though.

>masters in cyber security
nigger you need an experienced cryptographer (PhD) to test it. I guarentee it can be cracked in seconds.

The keyword here is "believe"

Attached: 1471926571476.jpg (262x274, 19K)

>neither can anyone else
>with a few colleagues
>a few colleagues
>anyone
Sure mate.

>where do i go from here?
Why don't you ask your cryptographer friends? They are cryptographers right?

AES256-CBC runs at somewhere between 0.5 and 1 GiB/s on modern x86 CPUs.
AES128-GCM, which is what this page is being served to you through, is around 3x faster.
(OP is, of course, lying. Please sage this thread.)

Now implement a backdoor for the Australian government.

i guess i need to go to a lawyer and actually talk it all through, i was just seeing if anyone had any experience with this sort of thing here
thank you anyway lads, appreciate it

i got it to encrypt a gb file in just under 2 seconds but i haven't got a top of the range pc

grammar was never my strong point

my next step was going to be to get it checked more thoroughly with pure mathematicians since thats how the algorithm is primarily based, i was just looking for advice on where to go to find that

thanks for the help guys, i get that it sounds like some random bullshitting online but this is something which has taken over my life for the past year or more, so it means a lot to those who did help
this is the point where threads start to die and turn into shitposting so thanks to all again and hopefully you hear about it soon

Just tell a little bit about your algorithm without revealing it. What kind of internal structure does it use? What type of mathematical problem are we talking about? How can it be faster than AES which is hardware accelerated?

>i was just seeing if anyone had any experience with this sort of thing here
We do, we have a lot of experience with situations like this.
The truth is we see newcomers creating revolutionary uncrackable encryption methods all the damn time. You would NOT believe how often it happens.

100% of the time it has turned out to be complete bullcrap.
I'm not saying it's very rare, I'm saying it has never happened and with all the red flags you're raising China is gonna be suing you for copyright infringement.
Whether you let a cryptographer look at what you have or not won't matter, because people already know they can't trust any encryption bullshit that can be trivially broken by any bored professional.

You wanna prove me wrong? You won't, because we both know your idea is too shitty to survive being analyzed.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

>pure mathematicians
You want cryptographers and if you have no track record as one yourself (eg. published some attacks against other ciphers) nobody will look at it because it's certainly complete bullshit.

>where do i go from here?

Attached: screenshot.png (670x649, 649K)

>i believe is uncrackable
Just because you're too dumb to crack it doesn't mean it's uncrackable. Make it public and try to get people to find issues with it. The more traction it gets the more cryptographers will validate its security.

>it is 2.1563364e+93 times more secure
Wat u mean? There are no practical attacks against aes faster than brute force. How did you come up with this number?

>i have built my own encryption method
>where do i go from here?
encrypt it