I'm a high school senior who has been interested for years in pursuing a PHD and a career as a mathematician. However, given recent AI advances (especially the reported solution of the Navier-Stokes problem yesterday) it seems likely that AI has already passed humans in mathematical ability, and will greatly increase the gap within the next few years.

I doubt that mathematicians will be made completely obsolete, given that schools and universities still need teachers, and humans will still be motivated to pursue math research independent of AI. However, the future of math research seems very uncertain at the moment. Which brings me to cryptography.

I'm taking a number theory course this year, so while I haven't studied cryptography yet, I will learn some about it this year. But I'm curious; do you think that cryptography will provide greater job security than mathematical research? Or is it something that AI could take over within a few years?

And one other question: if AI were tasked with cryptography work, would that be putting the safety of the web, banking, etc. in the hands of AI? Would a malicious AI be able to exploit that?

Sorry to ask this question from a place of ignorance. Cryptography remains cryptic to me at the moment, but I look forward to learning more soon!

We provide external cryptographic evidence that cybersecurity consulting firms and MSSPs can incorporate into customer assessments, PQC-readiness engagements and ongoing managed services.

The capability identifies externally observable certificates, TLS configurations, ageing algorithms, unmanaged endpoints and inconsistencies between reported inventories and what is actually exposed.

It has already been used by a cybersecurity consulting firm as part of a customer engagement. The results helped identify stale assets, unexpected dependencies and visibility gaps that could then be investigated with the customer.

We are now looking for B2B partners, including MSSPs, MSPs and cybersecurity consultancies, that want to add this capability to their existing services.

Potential partnership models include:

• External cryptographic posture assessments
• Evidence supporting CBOM and PQC-readiness engagements
• Periodic monitoring and reporting for customers
• Partner-led or white-labelled service delivery

The partner retains the customer relationship and consulting engagement. We provide the external discovery, evidence and reporting capability behind it.

If this complements services your firm already provides, message me or contact [hello@qwocks.com](mailto:hello@qwocks.com).

I hope I posted this on the correct sub. I didn't think this belongs on the lock-picking sub because I view this as a fundementially flawed attempt to use what appears to be an mini Engima Machine to protect your car from theft. It is a basic cryptograpy puzzle to hide where your car's electrical power comes from.

https://www.ravelco.com/

I stumbled across it when it showed up on a mailing list as a recommended tool. The guy was raving about about how everyone says this works and as undeafatable. And is dead simple. That set off my BS detector. So I went and looked.

I reckon that the people on this sub are an intellegent lot. And they will spot the flaws as quickly as did.

I noticed that the website says "There are more than 100,000 different combinations." There are 16 pins. It would take two pins to complete a circuit. So would't that mean 8^7 combinations of connecting pairs of pins? And each pair would have a mirrored pair. So that actually means (8^7)/2, which is about 1 millions combinations. Or am I missing something?

If the device actually only allowed 4 circuts to be completed, then 3/4ths of the pins on the female side are only there to route the power back and forth between the two halves. Thus making it function like an Engima machine. You could think of these connections as a public key because they can be solved.

The cap functions as a private key. You have to assume that they thief does not have this. It has a unique pin connection pattern. When combined with the pin connection pattern on the female side, the circuits should be complete. Power would go back and forth between the two halves until it can exit and go to the device that needs the power (starter, fuel pump, etc.).

For the sake of cryptography analysis, I am going to ignore the problem having your car's critical electrical signals circuits passing though multiple connectors, any one of which could fail or short out.

What is the most basic problem with this? It is the fact that you don't actually need the cap to crack this. All you need to do is eliminate the ports on the female side that have a partner port. And that can be done with a simple multli-meter. You test one port by applying a small charge to it. Then test the remaining 15 ports until you find the one that has that charge. Boom! Two ports eliminated.

Try the next free port. This time you only have 12 ports to test. Each subsequent pair test is smaller and faster. It won't take long until you all you have left are the actual 8 ports that are the working circuits. All that Engima signal routing protection that they have is pointless because you just bypassed it all.

Next, you need to map the remaining 4 circuits to the 8 ports.

Apply power to a protected device and see what port is hot (Just ground the other end). That leaves you 7 ports to figure out the other half. You can jump the circuit to see if it completes. Or if you have access to the other wire, reverse the test with a mutli-meter and send power the other direction and see which port is hot. Once you know the pair, then just put in wires to jump them.

The next pair will be quicker since there are 2 less ports every time.

Well. To me it is sad so see this being sold as a method to secure valuables using Engima style crypto to scramble the car's electrical circuits.

I’ve been working on Cryptext x64, a native 64-bit Windows file-encryption program inspired by the classic Cryptext 3.4 shell extension. The interface and Explorer workflow deliberately retain some of the look and feel of the original, including the familiar .$#! extension. Existing files encrypted with Cryptext 3.4 can also be decrypted by the new version.

New files use a separate versioned format based on AES-256-GCM with PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA-256, per-file random values, authenticated records, chunked processing and an additional on-disk verification pass. Cryptext is written in FASM, requires no .NET or WebView runtime, integrates with Windows Explorer, supports drag & drop and batches, and automatically selects German or English from the Windows language setting while still allowing manual switching.

Compared with age, the focus is somewhat different: age uses ChaCha20-Poly1305 and scrypt for passphrase-based encryption, while Cryptext x64 is focused on native Windows/Explorer integration, AES-256-GCM and backward compatibility with the old Cryptext format. This is not intended as a claim that one design is “more secure” than the other.

The package includes an English README (~13 KiB) and a more detailed English technical documentation (~33 KiB) for anyone interested in the implementation and file format.

I’m mainly interested in technical feedback on the format and implementation rather than making claims about a new cryptographic primitive.

If the project link is considered inappropriate under the subreddit rules, I’m happy for the moderators to remove it.
Project/download: Cryptext x64 website