[cryptography] Godfather of Anonymity David Chaum on BBC

2014-09-03 Thread John Young

Horizon: The defenders of anonymity on the internet

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29032399


___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] Weak random data XOR good enough random data = better random data?

2014-09-03 Thread Joseph Ashwood

From: Lodewijk andré de la porte
Subject: Re: [cryptography] Weak random data XOR good enough random data = 
better random data?


Come to think of it, is there or why isn't there a block-cipher mode that 
chains using a hashing algorithm?


The main reason would be difficulty in proving security.

Spacing on the term right now, but I’ll call it a cycle. Every hash function 
has cycles, so to define it:


H[0] = Hash(input)
H[N]= Hash(H[N-1])

The problem is that H[i] == H[j] where i =/= j. Every input for every hash 
has cycles, and current hashes have large numbers of them.


CTR mode relies on the cycle length being the 2^block_size. CBC relies on 
the cycle length being very long. Proving the minimum cycle length in a hash 
is not something that I am aware ever having been done, making it 
effectively impossible to prove security.


So while using a hash function in the block chaining sounds like a good 
idea, because we have proofs of security for CTR and CBC that say they are 
no weaker than the cipher, the hash mode would have to actually prove that 
it is stronger than the underlying cipher for the extra computation to be 
worth it.


I can’t say that it is impossible to do, just that it hasn't been done, and 
I don't expect it to be done.

   Joe

___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] Weak random data XOR good enough random data = better random data?

2014-09-03 Thread Tony Arcieri
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Lodewijk andré de la porte l...@odewijk.nl
wrote:

 If I XOR probably random data with good enough random data, does that
 result in at least good enough random data?


Yes, in fact, it's provably at *least* as random as the most random of the
two data sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_cipher

-- 
Tony Arcieri
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [cryptography] Weak random data XOR good enough random data = better random data?

2014-09-03 Thread Ryan Carboni
isn't the simplest solution would be to concatenate or XOR a counter?

Thus H[0] = Hash(input)
H[N] = Hash(H[N-1]+CTR)

considering that hashes from MD4 to SHA-2 all have block sizes of 512 bits,
much larger than their outputs, one could simply concatenate a 128-bit
counter.
___
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography