From Friday, April 19th (11:00 PM CDT) through Saturday, April 20th (2:00 PM CDT), 2024, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.

We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.

LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Can you give me some suggestions for encryption decryption

ok i've written my own encryption decryption techniqu can you suggest me some better methods

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 8
(3,542 Views)

Can you convert it to 2011.

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos are always welcome if you got solution to some extent.

I need my difficulties because they are necessary to enjoy my success.
--Ranjeet
0 Kudos
Message 2 of 8
(3,521 Views)

What do you mean by better? ... More secure? Faster? Reliable? Practicality? Feasibility?

 

Have you published this wok in a journal or conference proceeding?

 

This paper is a few years old, but you could start here: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1598556&queryText%3DA+Performance+Com...

 

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 8
(3,493 Views)

How about this?

 

I made it to work for text files, but it will work for binary files too with very little modifications.

 

Basic encryption is simple XOR a data stream and a repeating key, decrypt by XOR the encrypted data with the same key.

 

The longer the key the more secure the encryption.

 

enc-dec.png

 

========================
=== Engineer Ambiguously ===
========================
Message 4 of 8
(3,464 Views)

Not to publish ... this is very simple ... i just want to know should i improve this or scrap this

0 Kudos
Message 5 of 8
(3,442 Views)

You should not store the encryption key inside the encrypted file.

 

This makes your encryption weak in general.

 

You seem to have "security through obscurity" in your enc/dec algorithm.

========================
=== Engineer Ambiguously ===
========================
0 Kudos
Message 6 of 8
(3,425 Views)

@karthik9 wrote:

Not to publish ... this is very simple ... i just want to know should i improve this or scrap this



You haven't replied but I guess I haven't answered your question either...

 

Sure it works but from a LV programming standpoint it is very redundant and Rube Goldberg like.

 

IMHO you should scrap what you have or at least clean it up.

 

I am a long ways from being a LV expert but there are the things that pop right out at me when I see your code.

You use identical code in three places, make it a sub-vi.

Why start with a constant of -1 and increment it once inside your for-loop? This value will always be 0. 

Don't use array size to set the number of iterations of your for-loop then use the iteration counter to index an array inside the loop, use auto indexing. 

Your block diagram is sloppy and hard to follow.

 

 

========================
=== Engineer Ambiguously ===
========================
0 Kudos
Message 7 of 8
(3,378 Views)

The topic of this thread has been revisited And other alternatives posted.

Message 8 of 8
(3,135 Views)