Sorry your browser is not supported!

What do you think? It's been tested, works good enough. Only two minor artifacts.

"rawr" will produce the same as "awrr", because of the (irreversible!) averaging technique.

I'm not sure if the random generator will produce different results on different machines. I doubt it will, but still...

Sorry, it has been brought to my attention by Darkcoder that this is actually a hashing technique. Oh well.

Ok, so maybe it sucks, but it's ok for my first try, right?

Interesting but it seems to be a one way encryption. Can you reverse it from the derived string to get the original?

As for the averaging, you might try

sum+=(int(to_be_encrypted[i])*(i+1));

This at least weighs each character value against it's position within the string. It's no guarantee that some other string won't produce the same result.

As for producing the same result on different machines, I'd say it depends on where the srand and rand functions reside and if there's any difference between them. Assuming that they're in some DLL it's possible that the routine could be different unless Microsoft has made an effort to maintain compatibility across all distributions.