Not sure this article is near the mark
Not sure, but this article may be totally wrong. NSA's semi-recently-released Boak Lectures talk about SAVILLE as if it were a whole project for voice encryption, not a specific cipher. It also clarifies at least one thing VINSON referred to (cryptographic modernization?).
I'm making a hash of things because it's been weeks since I read the document. And even if I'm right that this is what SAVILLE was in the document, it may be that (for instance) docs related to the AIM chip refer to "the SAVILLE cipher" when they mean the ciphers needed for interop with some SAVILLE system. Or the codeword may have been reused for a different prupose entirely.
Verifiability is weak. Notability is questionable, because we can't do much with the vague knowledge we have here. Should this article exist?
(On the other hand, Wikipedia's performing some kind of service here, because nobody else is going to aggregate the scattered public knowledge about, e.g., BATON.)
Technically, it probably shouldn't exist since nearly everything is speculative, likewise with BATON. But keeping it with an obvious note as to its evolution might be OK. Mmernex (talk) 21:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)