Talk:Timeline of cryptography

Untitled

I copied this page from Wikibooks Cryptography. It needs work but I think it is more likely to get attention in wikipedia and I think it has a legit place there. I did not edit the content for the first posting so we would have a history trail. I plan to remove some purely computing items (e.g. Deep Blue). Here are some items that I think should be added:

• William Friedman (various dates)
• RSA challenge factored
• Netscape random number flaw
• Universal v. Remerdez
• NSA DSA
• WEP crack
• KL-7 intro/retirement
• STU-III intro

I'll be adding items to the article as I get dates, but help and additions are, of course, welcome --agr 03:13, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I've deleted items that have been added --agr 01:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Date

"IDEA algorithm is still under patent" Better if we can say "IDEA algorithm is under patent until XXX". Rich Farmbrough 15:01, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we actually need this sentence. The freeness of IDEA used to be more important, as it was the primary cipher used in early versions of PGP, but there are now plenty of alternatives used in OpenPGP. — Matt Crypto 15:16, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Period names

The sectioning into periods would be more meaningful if every period would receive a name or description. Piet 16:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Shit

This article is shit. It is not about scientific discoveries and new cryptoprimitives or protocols, it is about unimportant events now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.72.200.203 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). -- intgr [talk] 00:17, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

A little bit of context matters. If the reason for inclusion within the timeline is not clear it most likely suffers from brevity. We just have to add a sentence or two to provide more context so the reader can see the connection. If that is not possible then the IP above might be correct in their description of unimportant events. - Shiftchange (talk) 22:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)