• conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    That’s a terrible definition, but “codes” is doing the heavy lifting.

    It is not a code, in that definition, if it does not require knowledge of a key to decode.

    It is literally impossible for anything that doesn’t have a secret key to qualify as cryptography. That is the entire defining trait.

    • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s a terrible definition

      How so?

      And what do you think I’ve been talking about this whole time if not forms of substitution?

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The “key” is the mapping of cipher alphabet to message alphabet.

        There has to be a secret to be cryptography. The meaning has to be hidden without the secret information (though primitive/weak attempts can have a small enough search space to be brute forced). But the content being hidden without that information is the entirety of what the word means.