User talk:DrEubanks

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Skippydo (talk) 23:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Skippydo (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

personal message

This is a personal message, perhaps not appropriate for this page, but I didn't know how otherwise to communicate with you. Feel free to delete it once you've read it.

Hi Dr. Eubanks, I know we appear to be on different sides of the issue, but I don't actually want to undermine your research career. I personally do not feel threatened or otherwise negative about the Kish cipher, and I would be surprised and delighted to find out that the Kish cipher is indeed secure. My edits are based instead on my strong belief that (a) it is insecure, (b) information-theoretic security is in general impossible without quantum information or (as is perhaps used in this case) assumptions about the capabilities of the adversary and (c) its supposed security is based on overstatements by Kish that risk misleading others, if accepted in forums like Wikipedia.

It looks from your articles that you have done some serious EE work on non-Kish-cipher related topics. If I could offer you some unsolicited career advice, it would be to look skeptically at the Kish cipher before you stake your professional reputation on it. Don't take my word for it: ask some EE profs you trust in different areas, who have no professional connection to Kish.

I'd be happy to discuss further if you want. Google my name to find my email if you want to follow up. Best wishes. Aram.harrow (talk) 23:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)