Cryptography-Digest Digest #672, Volume #12 Wed, 13 Sep 00 16:13:00 EDT
Contents:
Re: Scottu19 Broken ("Douglas A. Gwyn")
Re: For the Gurus ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Police want help cracking code to find Enigma machine (Mike Rosing)
Re: nice simple function (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: Scottu19 Broken (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: question on the bible code (TaoenChristo)
Re: Crypto Related Pangrams (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: Dickman's function (Eric Bach)
Re: question on the bible code (TaoenChristo)
Re: question on the bible code ("Mikal 606")
Attack on Free-MAC ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: question on the bible code (JCA)
Re: For the Gurus (Jim Gillogly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Scottu19 Broken
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:11:20 -0400
Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
> "Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
> > Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
> > > Perfectly. This the raison d'etre of high-level programming
> > > languages and comment statements in these, not to mention
> > > object-oriented design methodologies and other software
> > > engineering tools.
> > Object-oriented design has nothing to do with fixing the
> > problems in the example source code. More to the point
> > would be Kernighan & Plauger's "The Elements of Programming
> > Style".
> Object-oriented design is destined to help one to procede
> from a concept/objective to the code in a programming
> language. ...
As I said, that has nothing to do with fixing the problems
in the example source code. As it turned out, the example
had been deliberately obfuscated, but if it had been
somebody's serious attempt at straight coding, it shows
major stylistic problems unrelated to commenting, object
orientation, or other aids to programming.
Suppose an English-language novel contained text like:
da boiz bEEt, him puRt-
y gud?!
Unless the author was in total control and deliberately
introduced the equivalent of C obfuscation for plot purposes,
any sane person would not suggest that the author would have
done better to write the novel in verse form, or with
marginal notes, etc. The real problem would be incompetence
in the use of basic linguistic tools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: For the Gurus
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 17:22:02 GMT
Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "root@localhost " wrote:
:>
:> Any good Korean based editors on the net that are available in the
:> public
:> domain?
: I am ignorant of such resources. I once received an advertisement
: of a multi-language processing system that runs under MS Window,
: but forgot its name.
If you are willing to run FreeBSD, then you will want to look at
http://www.freebsd.org/ports/korean.html, where at least three
different hangul editors are described and downloadable.
--
Mike Andrews
Tired old sysadmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Mike Rosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Police want help cracking code to find Enigma machine
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:40:19 -0500
"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
> Actually no, it has the characteristics of a cover text for a
> steganographic message. Unfortunately for us, the exact geometry
> on the text in the letter is probably important for decoding it.
>
> The interesting question is, why would there be a hidden message
> when the overt one seems to be sufficient?
An actual method of contact which is both secure and safe for both
sides. The blacked out paragraph may state something publicly,
and have the real method hidden. Sounds like fun for everyone :-)
Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: nice simple function
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:09:31 +0200
"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
>
> Obviously, a function is nonlinear iff it is not linear.
>
> I think what you mean is that *measuring* the *degree* to
> which a function is nonlinear is not usually described.
> That's because it isn't relevant for the formal algebraic
> development.
Yes. There are obviously all kinds/degrees of non-linearity
and to get/choose a measure is problematical, I suppose.
M. K. Shen
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Scottu19 Broken
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:20:30 +0200
"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
>
> As I said, that has nothing to do with fixing the problems
> in the example source code. As it turned out, the example
> had been deliberately obfuscated, but if it had been
> somebody's serious attempt at straight coding, it shows
> major stylistic problems unrelated to commenting, object
> orientation, or other aids to programming.
It is correct, as you indicated, that good style makes
the source code understandable and hence easier to
achieve bug-freeness. I was pointing out that the
existence of software engineering tools/methodologies
comes from the fact that it is not trivial to write
very good programs as such (much experience required).
Whether one opts to use these aids is of course another
matter.
M. K. Shen
------------------------------
From: TaoenChristo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.bible.prophecy
Subject: Re: question on the bible code
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 17:58:57 GMT
In article <8pmi78$se1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand many peoples deep desire to believe in this code.
> But I ask you, what else does it add?Are you not already a believer?
> Do you understand what I mean?
>
> "TaoenChristo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8pm1ig$a2f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8pbko1$n2m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "John Kennedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:9lcu5.20946$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > Then explain it.
> > > > >Whats your interest in the matter?
> > > > I think it's just interesting to see the names pop up....
> > >
> > > heres a good handling of ELS-
> > > /
> > > http://www.nctimes.net/~mark/fcodes/elsyesh.htm
> > >
> > >
> >
> > To explain why the ELS in the Bible is unique, you must understand,
it
> > is not just the occurance of words at certain skip lengths, as the
> > author of this web page assumes. Even if the word Yeshua occured
with
> > cross (or whatever) in differant text, that shows nothing, but a
neat
> > coincidence... now find me ANY text that has the following words:
> >
> > Herod, Annas and Judas, ALL 12 diciples,"the Marys weep
bitterly," "let
> > him be crucified," "true Messiah" and "son of Mary"
> >
> > These in turn are intersected by hundreds of other similar ELSs.
> >
>
> It *has to be reconstructed* from the Hebrew alphabet and you can
rebuild
> all kinds of words when the original alphabet is missing vowels!
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. tk th vwls frm n nglsh sntns,
nw hw cn mr wrds b rblt? Actually, we are using hebrew words and
definitions, except where actually names and dates are concerned and
then we use phonetically accurate representations. It is true that
there are sometime 2 or 3 ways of tranliterating from english names to
hebrew, however, this in no way makes it "more likely" that the name
will be found. All this has meant (to me at least) is that sometimes it
takes us 2 or 3 shots at a name, before we get it right.
> > All of these words and phrases are found intersecting Isaiah 52-53.
The
> > odds of all of the above phrases and words being found in ELS code,
in
> > only 2 chapters of one book of 66, would be somewhere around 1 in
> > 3,408,749,015,176,240,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
> >
> Really now!
> > though you might be able to find Yeshua intersecting Christ or some
> > other such combinations in other books, I find it to very unlikely
that
> > you will EVER find the combinations above in any other book
anywhere!
> >
> > --
> > Romans 1 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the
> > world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are
made,
> > even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
> >
> >
>
> Jeremiah 14:14
> Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I
sent
> them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they
> prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of
nought, and
> the deceit of their heart.
Do you realize how almost impossible it is to use the bible code for
prophecy? The Bible Code is not for telling the future. The bible code
is simply another dimesion of our Bible, which contains ALL events
present and past and even those that COULD happen. The Bible contains
all of the wisdom of all time, and that simply is impossible in a
simple 66 book collection. Why do you find it so hard to believe that
there might be a "hidden" dimension to the bible? I think the
likelihood is great, given our understanding (through his holy word) of
the nature of God. Very likely.
--
Romans 1 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the
world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Crypto Related Pangrams
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:36:45 +0200
wtshaw wrote:
>
> Here are some the pangram bug has caused me to write. Anyone else want to
[snip]
What is a 'pangram'? Is it generated automatically through
randomly choosing a grammatical structure and randomly
filling the proper kind of words at the nodes of the tree?
M. K. Shen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Bach)
Crossposted-To: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Re: Dickman's function
Date: 13 Sep 2000 18:51:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
George Marsaglia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Francois Grieu wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to find or devise simple C code to compute Dickman's
>> function.
Patterson and Rumsey devised a method based on piecewise approximation
by analytic functions. I don't think they ever published it but
it is described in
E. Bach and R. Peralta,
Asymptotic Semismoothness Probabilities,
Mathematics of Computation 65 (1996), 1701-1715.
We give references to other methods too.
--Eric Bach
------------------------------
From: TaoenChristo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.bible.prophecy
Subject: Re: question on the bible code
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 18:53:49 GMT
In article <8pmi78$se1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand many peoples deep desire to believe in this code.
But I ask you, what else does it add?Are you not already a believer?
Do you understand what I mean?
I have no desire to believe in anything in this world, actually. I have
faith in only one thing, and that is the God who resides within me, in
the Holy spirit, that is the same God who walked in the flesh, was
crucified, died and rose again. This is where my "belief" and
my "faith" lie. Not in things seen, like the bible, or the code or the
cross or anything else of a material essence. I place my faith in God,
and him alone do I believe in.
I understand what you mean, but you must understand what *I* mean as
well. God has given us this book. It is said to be His Word. I believe
that, but only because the Holy Spirit testifies to its authenticity.
So now, you are asking me, "what good is this? What does it Add?"
Are you serious? What it adds is an entire new dimension to our present
understanding of Gods Word. Why would God purposely HIDE codes in the
Bible, that could not be seen or understood untill the event of the
computers? True, these codes could not be found, were it not for the
computer. So then God must have meant mankind to find these codes at a
particular time, for a particular reason.
My question to you, now, would be this: If the Bible Codes are real
(and I have no doubt that they are), then how could you NOT look into
it? How could you NOT want to see what it is God has to tell us, in
this age and in this day? If there is a code in the Bible then
wouldn't you want to know? Why would God put a code in the bible, if he
did not want us to search it out, and discover it?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.bible.prophecy
Subject: Re: question on the bible code
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 15:06:24 -0700
"TaoenChristo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8poifh$9ip$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> My question to you, now, would be this: If the Bible Codes are real
> (and I have no doubt that they are), then how could you NOT look into
> it? How could you NOT want to see what it is God has to tell us, in
> this age and in this day? If there is a code in the Bible then
> wouldn't you want to know? Why would God put a code in the bible, if he
> did not want us to search it out, and discover it?
"Do you realize how almost impossible it is to use the bible code for
prophecy? The Bible Code is not for telling the future. The bible code
is simply another dimesion of our Bible, which contains ALL events
present and past and even those that COULD happen. The Bible contains
all of the wisdom of all time, and that simply is impossible in a
simple 66 book collection."
Thats your quote from another post on this subject.
Did you know that 26 letters contain all events, past present and future?
All you need is the correct algorithm!
>
>
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Attack on Free-MAC
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 15:11:35 -0400
There was a scheme proposed some time back for MAC along with encryption,
called Free-MAC (attached below)
encryption in FREE_MAC is:
y_i = E_k( x_i + y_{i-1} ) + x_{i-1}
I have a lowerbound on such schemes. This paper is available
at http://eprint.iacr.org/2000/039/
The lower bound says that any linear scheme which does
MAC and encryption together would require at least log m extra
encryptions (m is the number of blocks).
That would imply that the above scheme is broken. Various
attacks on this scheme were posted earlier as well. However,
doubts remained about various simple fixes. Using the lower
bound, I demonstrate below that this scheme needs major overhaul.
Let M_i denote the intermediate quantity x_i+y_{i-1},
and N_i denote E_k(x_i+y_{i-1}).
Here is a known plaintext attack (first shown to me by Pankaj Rohatgi).
Let y' be the new ciphertext, and
let primed variables denote the new quantities.
Now,
N_{i+2}= y_{i+2}+x_{i+1}
N_i = y_i +x_{i-1}
Let y'_i = y_i +N_i+N_{i+2} (all earlier y' remain same as y)
Then N'_i = N_{i+2}
Hence M'_i = M_{i+2}
x'_i= x_i+M_i+M_{i+2}
Let y'_{i+1}= y+{i+1}+M_i+M_{i+2}
Then, N'_{i+1}= N_{i+1}
hence, M'_{i+1} = M_{i+1}
So, x'_{i+1}= x_{i+1} + N_i +N_{i+2}
Let, y'_{i+2}= y_{i+2}
Then, N'_{i+2}= N_{i+2}+N_i+N_{i+2}= N_{i}
So, M'_{i+2}= M_i
Hence, x'_{i+2}= x_{i+2}
So, x'_{i+2}=x_{i+2}, and y'_{i+2}=y_{i+2}, and the computation continues
unperturbed !!
If the last block was a checksum of the plaintexts, then this would require a
chosen plaintext attack. All in all, any such scheme is hopeless. However,
see the aforementioned paper for new and interesting schemes which are
provably secure. They are also quite simple.
-Charanjit Jutla
From: Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Free-MAC mode
Date: 07 Mar 2000 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Trace: newscontent-01.sprint.ca 952476942 209.5.124.20 (Tue, 07 Mar 2000 19:55:42
EST)
Organization: Sprint Canada Inc.
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 19:55:42 EST
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Following on from the discussion of block modes which try to exhibit error
propagation to give a MAC or MDC combined with a block mode in the thread
with subject "avoid man-in-the-middle known plaintext attack using a stream
cipher", here's a block mode Anton and I have been working on.
encryption is:
y_i = E_k( x_i + y_{i-1} ) + x_{i-1}
and decryption is:
x_i = D( y_i + x_{i-1} ) + y_{i-1}
In practice to make a MAC out of this you would append a fixed block to the
message and verify that this fixed block was preserved on decryption. This
block could be public, or perhaps could be the IV, or a separate key.
We are working on a paper describing the Free-MAC mode, and output feedback
as a way to get error propagation on the decryption operation of a block
mode.
The result is likely to be essentially as efficient as CBC encryption, and
doesn't suffer the block swapping attacks that Propagating-CBC,
Plaintext-CBC, iaPCBC and CBCC do.
Adam
------------------------------
From: JCA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.bible.prophecy
Subject: Re: question on the bible code
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:11:12 -0700
This stuff has already been thoroughly debunked like the
scam it is.
Mikal 606 wrote:
> I understand many peoples deep desire to believe in this code.
> But I ask you, what else does it add?Are you not already a believer?
> Do you understand what I mean?
>
> "TaoenChristo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8pm1ig$a2f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8pbko1$n2m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "John Kennedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:9lcu5.20946$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > Then explain it.
> > > > >Whats your interest in the matter?
> > > > I think it's just interesting to see the names pop up....
> > >
> > > heres a good handling of ELS-
> > > /
> > > http://www.nctimes.net/~mark/fcodes/elsyesh.htm
> > >
> > >
> >
> > To explain why the ELS in the Bible is unique, you must understand, it
> > is not just the occurance of words at certain skip lengths, as the
> > author of this web page assumes. Even if the word Yeshua occured with
> > cross (or whatever) in differant text, that shows nothing, but a neat
> > coincidence... now find me ANY text that has the following words:
> >
> > Herod, Annas and Judas, ALL 12 diciples,"the Marys weep bitterly," "let
> > him be crucified," "true Messiah" and "son of Mary"
> >
> > These in turn are intersected by hundreds of other similar ELSs.
> >
>
> It *has to be reconstructed* from the Hebrew alphabet and you can rebuild
> all kinds of words when the original alphabet is missing vowels!
>
> > All of these words and phrases are found intersecting Isaiah 52-53. The
> > odds of all of the above phrases and words being found in ELS code, in
> > only 2 chapters of one book of 66, would be somewhere around 1 in
> > 3,408,749,015,176,240,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
> >
>
> Really now!
>
> > though you might be able to find Yeshua intersecting Christ or some
> > other such combinations in other books, I find it to very unlikely that
> > you will EVER find the combinations above in any other book anywhere!
> >
> > --
> > Romans 1 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the
> > world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
> > even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
> >
> >
>
> Jeremiah 14:14
> Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent
> them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they
> prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and
> the deceit of their heart.
>
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Jim Gillogly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: For the Gurus
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:25:25 +0000
"root@localhost " wrote:
> Even a monoalphabetic substitution system can be secure under the right
> conditions. For example, what does this say? LMUU MEOZ AQDR LEXX It
> is a simple keyword based mono-alphabetic substitution cipher. I expect
> this one is do-able with machine assist but if I had left off the last
> word it would not be as easy a problem.
Actually, it's still do-able without the last plaintxt word, leaving
the ciphertext at LMUU MEOZ, given the information that it's based on
a simple keyword. A brute force dictionary attack using a smallish
dictionary I built in the early 80's for a Boggle ripoff for the H89,
sorted by useful trigraphs in the plaintext, gives this for the top
few scores:
alumna(15): 29. monnotak
becalm(1): 29. detteany
delusion(25): 29. dreercha
dossier(1): 29. nottoday
geology(10): 29. tellersp
glum(15): 29. monnotak
gorse(1): 29. nottoday
horse(1): 29. nottoday
hostess(1): 29. nottoday
igneous(12): 29. dettersn
kosher(1): 29. nottoday
sedulous(11): 29. tessequo
socket(1): 29. nottoday
soiree(1): 29. nottoday
soothe(1): 29. nottoday
sputter(17): 29. zallanci
stupefy(17): 29. zallanci
utility(7): 29. witticks
bundle(23): 30. hreerisc
condemn(1): 30. netteday
ginmill(16): 30. oneentyj
insulate(25): 30. freerisa
maraud(12): 30. corroven
needham(1): 30. metteany
nubile(23): 30. hreerisc
enough(11): 31. dessepro
exposure(14): 31. derrempl
permute(25): 31. reffecta
ghoulish(11): 32. tessearo
As you can see, the correct plaintext appears for several different
keywords, including the correct one. Despite the ciphertext being
way under the unicity point for English, the added information of
the simple coherent keyword is enough to allow the break.
Note that although you're limiting the cipher clerk to pencil
and paper, you can't limit the attacker in that way.
--
Jim Gillogly
Mersday, 22 Halimath S.R. 2000, 18:59
12.19.7.9.16, 5 Cib 19 Mol, Seventh Lord of Night
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and sci.crypt) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
End of Cryptography-Digest Digest
******************************
