| 'Quantum Encryption Via Satellite' | Login/Create an Account | 62 comments |
Search Discussion
|
|
Threshold:
-1: 62 comments
0: 48 comments
1: 41 comments
2: 19 comments
3: 7 comments
4: 2 comments
5: 0 comments
No Comments
Threaded
Nested
Flat
Oldest First
Newest First
Highest Scores First
Oldest First (Ignore Threads)
Newest First (Ignore Threads)
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
|
Sounds great... (Score:1, Offtopic)
by Dancin_Santa
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:10PM EST
(#3)
(User #265275 Info)
|
But what is the practical usefulness of this outside of the military?
Dancin Santa
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
still subject to "human engineering" (Score:2, Insightful)
by fetta on Friday June 29, @04:13PM EST
(#5)
(User #141344 Info)
|
Sounds pretty slick, but wouldn't it still be vulnerable if "bob" or "alice" (from the example in the story) left their computer (or other communication device) where other people had access to it?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
To paraphrase Doctor Who (Score:2)
by graveyhead
(clayurn @ hotmail.com)
on Friday June 29, @04:13PM EST
(#6)
(User #210996 Info)
|
DW: I never cared much for the term "uncrackable", it seems a bit too much like "unsinkable".
Brigadier: What's wrong with "unsinkable"?
DW: "Nothing," said the iceberg to the Titanic [glug glug glug]
Well, your fingers weave quick minarets; Speak in secret alphabets;
I light another cigarette; Learn to forget |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Cracked... (Score:1)
by VivianC
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:15PM EST
(#9)
(User #206472 Info)
|
A cracked image for an H card was then posted on alt.hack.dtv and listed on eBay!
Mmmmmm. Quantum Spice channel.
Viv
-----------
"You are just a small cog on a small wheel that is attached to nothing." |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
hmmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
by 3-State Bit on Friday June 29, @04:16PM EST
(#11)
(User #225583 Info)
|
methinks I remember an unbreakable cryptosystem, also via satellite. This piece does not mention Professor Rabin.
~
A bit is either on, off or nonexistent |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:hmmm.... by wfaulk (Score:1) Friday June 29, @04:21PM EST
- Re:hmmm.... by Avinoam (Score:1) Friday June 29, @04:44PM EST
|
so... (Score:3, Funny)
by JohnnyKnoxville on Friday June 29, @04:18PM EST
(#18)
(User #311956 Info)
|
when aliens finally do intercept our transmissions they will think we all speak giberish.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:so... by cube farmer (Score:2) Friday June 29, @05:01PM EST
|
A bit of clarification (Score:3, Informative)
by TrumpetPower! on Friday June 29, @04:19PM EST
(#19)
(User #190615 Info)
http://www.trumpetpower.com/
|
The communication doesn't have to travel via satellite. The satellite is just used to exchange keys.
Or, in other words, this solves the same problem as RSA and D-H key exchange techniques. Once both sides have agreed on keys, you could use carrier pigeons for the actual excrypted data transmission.
b&
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
The Economist? (Score:1)
by HaeMaker
(william at hae dot com)
on Friday June 29, @04:25PM EST
(#24)
(User #221642 Info)
http://www.hae.com
|
Haardly a technical journal...
Anyone have anything from a better source?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Not New, but Important (Score:2, Informative)
by qxjit on Friday June 29, @04:25PM EST
(#25)
(User #461981 Info)
|
While this kind of quantum cryptograhy has been around for awhile, the article is correct in stating that such expiraments have only been done across wires until this point. The really neat thing about this is that it really is safe. These technologies do not rely on security through obscurity in any way. The key is sent quantumly, and cannot be intercepted without breaking the quantum entanglement of the particles. Once a secure key has been transmitted, it does need to be protected within the software, but that is much easier than protecting is as it flies through the air. The security of the key as it is transmitted is protected by the laws of physics, which is what makes this so secure. While there is no silver bullet to the problem at hand, this solves fundamental problem of keys being sniffed during transit without anyone knowing. From here there are a lot of other problems to solve, but its a big step toward secure transmissions in the open.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
So store and forward basicly becomes impossible. (Score:3, Insightful)
by bons
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:25PM EST
(#26)
(User #119581 Info)
http://www.nozen.com
|
| This means in order to be secure the message need to be beamed directly from the source to the receiver.
Ok. So it's fine to authenticate the source of the transmission, assuming that you only care about the last machine to touch the transmission, but when the transmission passes through multiple machines you can't prove the original source from the data received at the destination. All you can do is hope all the previous connections are trustworthy.
Now how many people here work with a technology that has NO store and forward capability?
No Zen is good zen |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Two reasons why this isn't big (Score:4, Insightful)
by Sheepdot
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:26PM EST
(#27)
(User #211478 Info)
http://www.sheepdot.org
|
There are two big problems I have with this "new" technology.
1) It isn't anywhere near feasible for common use, nor cheap enough.
2) We already have "pretty good privacy". It's not the best, but it is sufficient and now we need to work on the next big step: securing both ends.
I think we've pretty much covered the encryption news to death and left out some of the big stuff, the compromising of a machine on either end of the communication.
What good does a secure method of communication do when the website you are dealing with stores your credit card info in clear text databases on machines 4 different crackers have access too?
What good is securing a transmission with a customer when their Windows box is already compromised by a Subseven server?
I guess what my biggest beef with secure communication overkill like this is that we've already determined it is possible to secure a transmission. We haven't determined how to properly secure both the client and the server.
Sheepdot.org - Finally free of the horror of owning the domain. |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe im confused since IANAP (physicist) (Score:1)
by qwerty823
(dem at chaostech dot com)
on Friday June 29, @04:29PM EST
(#29)
(User #126234 Info)
|
If Eve can't intercept the stream and recreate it verbatim back to Bob, then what kind of technology will this satelite have that can violate the laws of physics?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce Scheier comments on this (Score:2, Informative)
by fuzzyjk
(/. at exnext dot com)
on Friday June 29, @04:31PM EST
(#31)
(User #84369 Info)
|
Take a look at <A href="http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0103. html#6">the March Crypto-Gram</A>, where Bruce Schneier comments on the practicality of this.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
sorry to intrude on others' territory... (Score:1)
by 3-State Bit on Friday June 29, @04:38PM EST
(#36)
(User #225583 Info)
|
Shoeringer's cat, Meow,
plus 128 more cats,
Now we meow secure.
~
A bit is either on, off or nonexistent |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Just a thought. (Score:1)
by Avinoam
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:39PM EST
(#38)
(User #463509 Info)
|
I wonder what aliens will think when they land and see the great efforts we take in hiding things from ourselves.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Problem (Score:1)
by return 42 on Friday June 29, @04:39PM EST
(#39)
(User #459012 Info)
|
You'd have to trust the satellite, yes?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:Problem by phaktor (Score:1) Friday June 29, @05:05PM EST
|
sorry to intrude on others' territory (Score:1)
by 3-State Bit on Friday June 29, @04:43PM EST
(#43)
(User #225583 Info)
|
Shrodinger's cat, Meow
plus 128 more cats
now we meow secure.
~
A bit is either on, off or nonexistent |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
The author (Score:1)
by chompz
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
on Friday June 29, @04:45PM EST
(#45)
(User #180011 Info)
|
of that obviously didn't know a thing about what he was writing about, in fact, why he pinned this to Los Alamos scientists is beyond me, a discussion of this occurs in most undergraduate QM classes.
What a nice day... |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Quantum crypto to find NSA goons? (Score:3, Interesting)
by corvi42 on Friday June 29, @04:49PM EST
(#46)
(User #235814 Info)
http://www.silencegreys.com/memetic_labs/
|
| So this technique would allow you to know whether anyone was intercepting photons as they passed through a given medium. Has anyone thought of using this technique to positively identify whether anyone is really tapping underwater fiber optics like
this old article suggested.
It would be funny if the latest thing in crypto was able to catch the NSA with their pants down.
There are a thousand forms of subversion, but few can equal the convenience and immediacy of a cream pie -Noel Godin |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Further Reading (Score:2, Informative)
by Anne_Nonymous on Friday June 29, @04:49PM EST
(#49)
(User #313852 Info)
|
Simon Singh's "The Code Book" is very accessable to non-mathemeticians, and has an excellent chapter on quantum crypto.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
I see a problem here (Score:1)
by anon757 on Friday June 29, @04:55PM EST
(#51)
(User #265661 Info)
|
The reason that quantam encryption isn't used everywehere, is that it's so darn hard to detect the spin of single photons. I think it's extremley unlikley that they have figured out how to discern the spin of a stream of photons, over 10 kilomiters, with a 0% error rate (otherwise you've got a bad encryption key) when it can barely be done over inches. That being said, it's still only a secure (YES, 100% Unbreakable, unless you feel like violating the laws of phyisics) method of exchanging encryption keys, but once exchanged, the data is still vulnerable to brute force cracking, like distributed.net.
"I can eat worms! I can eat worms!!!" - Kimmi |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Is this really new? (Score:1)
by Mr. McGibby on Friday June 29, @04:59PM EST
(#53)
(User #41471 Info)
http://www2.cs.utah.edu/~gibson
|
This isn't new. The idea has been around awhile. It would have been nice if the author had talked about recent developments.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
Neat. (Score:2)
by Gray on Friday June 29, @05:02PM EST
(#59)
(User #5042 Info)
|
Get a big box into orbit and host the evilest copyright violatingest server ever.. Yum.
www.lowpass.net |
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
9 replies
beneath your current threshold.
|
Quantum Encryption Via Satellite
