Re: CRCs and passphrase hashing

2006-09-03 Thread Leichter, Jerry
Look up the paper Fingerprinting by random polynomials by Michael Rabin. -- Jerry On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Travis H. wrote: | Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:12:30 -0500 | From: Travis H. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | To: Cryptography

Re: skype not so anonymous...

2006-09-03 Thread Leichter, Jerry
| Fugitive executive is tracked down by tracing his Skype calls... | | http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060824-7582.html ...maybe. This article gets many fundamental details wrong. For one thing, Alexander wasn't nabbed - the very article they linked that word to simply says he was found.

Re: Impossible compression still not possible. [was RE: Debunking the PGP backdoor myth for good. [was RE: Hypothesis: PGP backdoor (was: A security bug in PGP products?)]]

2006-09-03 Thread John Denker
Dave Korn asked: Is it *necessarily* the case that /any/ polynomial of log N /necessarily/ grows slower than N? Yes. Hint: L'Hôpital's rule. if P(x)==e^(2x) That's not a polynomial. x^Q is a polynomial. Q^x is not. -

Re: Debunking the PGP backdoor myth for good. [was RE: Hypothesis: PGP backdoor (was: A security bug in PGP products?)]

2006-09-03 Thread Travis H.
On 8/28/06, Ondrej Mikle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Take as an example group of Z_p* with p prime (in another words: DLP). The triplet (Z, p, generator g) is a compression of a string of p-1 numbers, each number about log2(p) bits. Pardon my mathematical ignorance, but isn't Z just a notation to

uniformly random selection algorithms

2006-09-03 Thread Travis H.
I didn't know about this RFC, but apparently the IETF has a standard for selecting people randomly for sortition in a publicly-verifiable way. References: http://rfc.sunsite.dk/rfc/rfc3797.html http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3797.txt This got me to thinking about random selection. They take

correction to uniformly random selection algorithms

2006-09-03 Thread Travis H.
I just realized I made a small error in algorithm 2. On 9/2/06, Travis H. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. This algorithm seems to waste fewer bits: Initialize with c = 0. x = extraction of n bits That should read: x = extraction of ceil(lg(p-c)) bits Otherwise there's nothing gained by carrying