Rating: 
Summary: Showed potential of things to come
Review: This book is probably one of the most disappointing that I've ever read. After The Da Vinci Code, I was expecting a lot from this book. Even after reading the synopsis and the first couple of chapters I was still expecting a great read. Instead, what I received was mindless and ridiculous.Note, I know very little about computers and encryption, but I found the underlying story to be decently believable. However, some of the issues about which these characters struggle are so obvious that it makes these seemingly intelligent characters seem stupid (especially during the ending). Overall, an semi-entertaining read but one that was more frustrating then satisfying.
Rating: 
Summary: doubtful technology
Review: As soon as I started reading some of the tech descriptions I just thought "oh dear." Somebody please tell me how you can store 64 characters in a 64-bit key? And did anyone not realise the significance of NDAKOTA as soon as they saw it.
Worst of all is the character interaction. They pick some ridiculous things to argue about. And the top cryptographer, Susan, is completely brainless.
A three million processor supercomputer? Please.
Rating:
Summary: Being on-line was once a trippy hippy pursuit
Review: I get the same cheap thrills out of these sorts of books that I get out of porn or a scandal rag. I get a kick out if but it makes me feel dirty later on. Got the same sick buzz and disgust from reading In The Ghost Country. sincerely, from a working class hero who doesn't believe in the star system
Rating: 
Summary: Literary Devices In Digital Fortress
Review: Characterization in Dan Brown's Digital Fortress
Characterization can fall into two different categories, indirect and direct. Dan Brown's use of indirect characterization in Digital Fortress has strengthened it almost exponentially.
Susan Fletcher, the protagonist in this novel, is a somewhat mysterious character in the beginning of the storyline. But as the story moves further along, the reader is able to gather quite a few things that they normally would not have discovered. Because of this employment of indirect characterization, Brown is able to let on what Susan wants, and what she fears, but in a manner that is more, shall we say, secretive, than direct characterization. Brown utilizes this literary device very effectively. He is able to let the reader learn things about Susan as the plot progresses. Things that sometimes not even she knows. When things are written in this manner, they keep the reader in more a guessing state of mind, one that makes them interpret the scene differently than they would have normally.
Brown uses indirect characterization to keep his readers guessing. He allows for very open interpretation of his novel, which leads to a very interesting sub development in the sub plot. It is because of these reasons that Dan Brown's Digital Fortress gets a plus for being strengthened by the use of indirect characterization.
Rating:
Summary: Waste of print. Author is clueless about the technology
Review: I loved DaVinci Code but this was a piece of junk. Most fifth-graders know more about computers than Mr. Brown does. Implausable, and predictable. Save your money and your time.
Rating:
Summary: Total absurd
Review: The author knows nothing about computers, Internet, encryption and privacy but he dares to write about such things. "... a large glob of sizzling, liquefied lead fell on his arm." Wonder what he is soldering? Maybe copper pipes? Nope. "The chip he was trying to solder in place..." But of course, a computer chip! "According to the log, someone had unlocked her terminal while she was gone. 'Not possible!' she choked." But why not? Did author hear about administrative privileges? Root access? "... and lay a moment in the darkness of the mainframe computer." A guy whose weight is 400 pounds. Imagined? I want my money back.
Rating:
Summary: awful book by writer whose other works are awesome
Review: I love Dan Brown's other books and I couldn't believe how bad this one was. Clearly the publisher is capitalizing on readers like me who have high expectations based on Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons and Deception Point. The dialogue was bad, the characters were unlikeable and the plot progression was ridiculous. I kept reading thinking this book couldn't possibly end without a good twist or some redeeming feature. But it did.
Rating: 
Summary: For an IQ of 170, she's not so bright
Review: i'm no cybergeek but i was WAY ahead of the protagonist Susan. it's a good thing that the colonel is patient.
Rating:
Summary: Awful dreck, publisher should be ashamed
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed The DaVinci Code, so I rather eagerly bought this book, thinking it was new. But in fact, it is an older (1998) attempt at writing about technology that is just dreadful, and should never have made it out of manuscript form without a rigorous edit and rewrite (or two or three). While it is nice to realize how much Dan Brown has grown as a writer, I simply felt ripped off by the publisher. Absurd dialog, absurd plot replete with not-believable characters with about as much appeal as old carpet remnants. Clearly this was rushed into publication to capitalize on the success and fame of The DaVinci Code but for goodness sake, couldn't the publisher have run it through the editorial mill? I'd send my copy back to the publisher but paying for the postage would be throwing good money after bad.
Rating:
Summary: Techno thriller? Try techno-babble!
Review: I knew I wouldn't enjoy this book when 21 pages in the author completely botched the explanation of public key encryption. I'm not a cryptographer, computer scientist, or national security expert, just an average guy who uses a PC. Anyone who's ever read a single newspaper or internet article about encryption probably has the facts more correct than this author did.
Reading techno-thrillers, like sci-fi or big-budget action flicks requires a "suspension of disbelief." But if the author is going to try to pass himself off as an expert in something he clearly isn't, and make a huge mistake, it's hard to take anything after that seriously.
The rest of the cryptography discussion is over my limited knowledge, or completely made up, doesn't matter. The computing terms thrown in read like the author made a laundry list of every acronym, protocol, and technology he'd ever read about and just dumped them in every-other sentence to impress readers.
If you can use your computer for more than email and web browsing, you'll be thoroughly insulted by this.
And, yes, the plot is weaker than the single digit "kill code," as are the paper thin characters.
| 
