Talk:Hardware-based encryption/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Spinningspark (talk · contribs) 10:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

This is not going to be a full review because I think this article has a major problem with criterion 3a: "broad in its coverage". That puts it in immediate fail territory so I am going to limit my initial comments to that issue.

The lead says that "hardware-based encryption is the use of computer hardware to..." which establishes that computers are necessarily involved in encryption. This is not so, the article itself discusses the enigma machine, but dismisses it as not computer based. Logically, we could go back further to simple devices such as the diode coding matrix. I could also mention 1950s-60s style telephone scramblers, entirely hardware based.

I'm particularly concerned with the claim that ABYSS was the first hardware based encryption in 1987. Even if we accept that only computer-based encryption is being discussed, neither of the sources seem to state the fact (perhaps you could give an exact quote). Also, the use of "arguably" not only breaches WP:WTW but is an indication that editorialising is going on here.

This might be in a better place if the article had a different name, such as "Computer hardware based encryption". But as it stands, it needs a major rewrite and restructuring to be acceptable. SpinningSpark 10:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree, DES was created in the 70's and was mainly implemented in hardware which is a decade before ABYSS. There were a number of military hardware systems in use before DES which was civilian, and with its short key length accessible by the NSA/GCHQ. Enigma style machines continued into the 70s. Today there are a lot of hardware systems for encyption/decryption, look at bitcoin mining for the rapid process in problem solving using hardware in this area. RonaldDuncan (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'm failing the article at this point. There has been zero response from the nominator, not even to acknowledge the review is happening. SpinningSpark 16:25, 5 June 2018 (UTC)