Cryptography-Digest Digest #900, Volume #12 Wed, 11 Oct 00 22:13:01 EDT
Contents:
Re: Want Free Encryption? (Greggy)
Re: AES Runner ups (Greggy)
Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES? (Greggy)
Re: The state of play on Microsoft CSP signing... (Greggy)
Re: CPU's aimed at cryptography (Greggy)
Re: Comments on the AES winner (John Savard)
Re: German Lorenz Code Machine (John Savard)
Re: EKE, RSA, and Compression? (John Savard)
Re: AES Runner ups (John Savard)
Re: The state of play on Microsoft CSP signing... (Paul Rubin)
Re: A new paper claiming P=NP (Stas Busygin)
Re: Storing an Integer on a stream (Benjamin Goldberg)
Re: Storing an Integer on a stream (Benjamin Goldberg)
Re: Idea for Twofish and Serpent Teams (Benjamin Goldberg)
Re: Storing an Integer on a stream (Benjamin Goldberg)
Re: Pencil and paper cipher. (Benjamin Goldberg)
Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES? (Benjamin Goldberg)
Cryptograms Reposted -- PLEASE RESPOND (daniel mcgrath)
Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES? (Roger Schlafly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Greggy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Want Free Encryption?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:56:47 GMT
In article <ejESfK9MAHA.319@cpmsnbbsa09>,
"George Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can download an entire suite of encryption products with two file
> systems, email/ftp/point to point comunications, source code and a key
> management at
> www.endecs.com/uenigma.exe . These are really great professional
products
> and well worth the download.
>
HEY I gots free encryption already, pal!
--
If I were a cop, I would refuse to go on any no knock raid.
But then, I am not a cop for basically the same reasons.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Greggy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AES Runner ups
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:59:36 GMT
Well, now that is the most logical answer I have heard yet, but what
does the government do if the AES is found weak? Do they step back and
use 3des? Do they say we have to go back to something that we tried to
obsolete? That makes no sense to me at all, but then 3des was exactly
that for des, so I suppose it does make sense after all...
>
> Greggy wrote:
>
> > Let me rephrase - has the government stated any one of the other
five
> > finalists would be their backup deployment strategy if a problem was
> > uncovered with Rijndael on some type of official level?
>
> The rationale was that if a backup was picked, it either had to
be
> required or optional. If it was optional, interoperability problems
> might be created between implementations that used the optional
> algorithm and implementations that didn't. Plus it would mean a
> negotiation layer would have to be implemented, which adds whole new
> sets of security risks. If it was required that the backup algorithm
be
> implemented, the 'cost' of implementing the AES would equal the sum of
> the 'costs' of the two algorithms. This would probably more than
double
> the hardware and software resources required.
>
> DS
>
--
If I were a cop, I would refuse to go on any no knock raid.
But then, I am not a cop for basically the same reasons.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Greggy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES?
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:00:29 GMT
It was too far for most people to reach?
> Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES?
>
--
If I were a cop, I would refuse to go on any no knock raid.
But then, I am not a cop for basically the same reasons.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Greggy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The state of play on Microsoft CSP signing...
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:02:37 GMT
I will never use it, so I ain't got a clue. I recommend you do not
either.
> Hey all, how's life? Good, good... I've only got two questions, so
> I won't keep you long.
>
> Can anybody tell me what the current state of play is, regarding
> the signing - by Microsoft - of Cryptographic Service Providers
> destined for a party outside of North America (Britain, actually)?
>
> Further more, Microsoft have noted that in the future, elements of
> Microsoft outside of North America (Microsoft UK, Microsoft
> Germany, etc, etc, etc) will/may support the signing of CSPs. Does
> anybody know the current status of this proposal?
>
> Any information you may have would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> Simon Dainty
>
>
--
If I were a cop, I would refuse to go on any no knock raid.
But then, I am not a cop for basically the same reasons.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Greggy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CPU's aimed at cryptography
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:23:44 GMT
RSA moduli range from 80 to 2k
ECC field range from 50 to 500
Clearly you are correct. And it is the silicon space that has made
that decision for them, no doubt.
BUT if you look at the way they word their brochure, you don't know
what field size they are referring to. One might assume a comparable
field size to the 1k RSA test case, but they don't say that.
And they don't mention the field type, the curve parameters, etc.
Should we expect excrutiating details or not?
> JCA wrote:
> >
> > If we are talking 1024-bit RSA moduli, 32 ms for the signature
> > time is very unimpressive. Similar or better speeds are already
> > achieved in software on a medium range PA-RISC box, and much
> > faster performance on a 500 MHz IA64 box.
>
> But check out the M180e:
>
> Public Key Execution Unit
> - RSA signature time of 32ms supporting 13 IKE handshakes per
second.
> - Elliptic Curve cryptography signature time of 11ms
supporting 45.5 IKE
> hand- shakes per second.
>
> RSA isn't the target market.
>
> Patience, persistence, truth,
> Dr. mike
>
--
If I were a cop, I would refuse to go on any no knock raid.
But then, I am not a cop for basically the same reasons.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: Comments on the AES winner
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:06:37 GMT
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:44:01 +0000, Jim Gillogly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,
in part:
>I note that nobody who's talking has seen a show-stopper with the
>security of any of the five final candidates, nor, in fact, with
>many of the semi-finalists. The consensus is that <we> don't know
>how to break it, but nobody outside knows whether NSA, CSE, CESG, or
>anybody else does. I suspect that they can't, and that they can't
>break 3DES, but I don't have any firm basis for believing that one
>way or the other. I <strongly> suspect that they have much easier
>ways of getting the plaintext.
In most cases. But the precise value of cryptanalysis is that it used
to be effective when there were not other ways.
Encrypt off-line, and then take your floppy to the radio transmitter,
and you have in a low-tech way totally eliminated the worry that the
transmitter has picked up electronic leakage from the encipherment.
Of course, if the cipher clerks under an oppressive regime *want* to
make life easier for the NSA, it probably is hard to stop them,
particularly without the kind of sealed, special-purpose devices that
are easy enough to make in technologically advanced countries.
>The Robert H. Morris talk at
>http://chacs.nrl.navy.mil/ieee/cipher/old-conf-rep/conf-rep-Crypto95.html
>that I referenced a day or two ago says cryptanalysis is no longer the
>most effective means for governments (well, the US government
>anyway) to obtain plaintext, and that this was true by the middle
>to late 1960s, even before the introduction of DES.
Well, certainly by the mid-1970s, people could have implemented
enormously complex ciphers on 8-bit computers. Say a rotor machine
where a separate Hagelin lug and pin mechanism moved each rotor.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: German Lorenz Code Machine
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:54:48 GMT
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000 14:28:48 -0700, "David C. Barber"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>Are there any good references to the Lorenz machine online?
Try my site, at
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto/te0301.htm
but there are others on the web as well.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: EKE, RSA, and Compression?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:57:16 GMT
On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:39:46 +0200, Mok-Kong Shen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>But on the general assumption that the opponent knows
>the algorithm and hence in particular also this trick,
>I don't think that we could claim that this really
>functions.
Certainly it still functions. Because if you have N messages that are
200 letters long, there are 200^N possible ways to put them together
if this trick is used, to try to compare them for cryptanalysis.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: AES Runner ups
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:58:30 GMT
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:29:05 GMT, Tom St Denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote, in part:
>It's nothing like Rijndael. SAFER+ is not a "square" cipher.
No, but it works on whole bytes, and the bytes go _through_ S-boxes.
But since it uses different S-boxes, and a very different mixing
operation, it complements Rijndael well.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: Paul Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The state of play on Microsoft CSP signing...
Date: 11 Oct 2000 17:57:08 -0700
"Simon Dainty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can anybody tell me what the current state of play is, regarding
> the signing - by Microsoft - of Cryptographic Service Providers
> destined for a party outside of North America (Britain, actually)?
Same as before, I thought. You give them some paper saying you
won't break the US export rules, and they sign your CSP.
------------------------------
From: Stas Busygin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,sci.math,sci.op-research
Subject: Re: A new paper claiming P=NP
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:28:33 +0300
Paul Rubin wrote:
>
> Anyway, getting away from the digression on what P and NP are and how
> to convert postscript to pdf, there's a discussion thread on Slashdot
> about this paper and it sounds like a false alarm. Someone over there
> who seemed to know what he was doing started reading it, and found
> enough mistakes in the first few pages that he didn't feel it necessary
> to bother reading further.
FYI: If you know a refutation, please visit
http://www.geocities.com/st_busygin/clipat.html and post it as a
review using the appropriate link at the page. Otherwise, please
don't refer to such non-scientific sources as slashdot -- they
discussed even Plotnikov's photo but I've not seen any serious post
concerning the proposed matter there...
The author uses non-standard terminology sometimes, and some
people, for example, don't understand the difference between terms
"loopless" and "acyclic" and compose a "refutation" on this
basis...
BTW, I already realized vertex-saturating draft code -- it works
nicely. So, there is definitely no error in the first four
sections.
Best wishes,
Stas Busygin
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.busygin.dp.ua
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Storing an Integer on a stream
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:25:39 GMT
SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andras Erdei) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
[snip]
> >The method i like most is fibonacci coding:
> >
> >- start with the largest fib number smaller than your integer
> >
> >- if the current fib number is smaller than your number
> > substitute it and write down 1
> > else
> > write down 0
> >- take the next fib number
> >
> >Example:
> >
> >number: 15
> >fib: 1,1,2,3,5,8,13
> >encoding: 13+2 -> 0010001
> >
> >This way you encoded your (arbitrarily big number) in a way that
> >there are *no consecutive 1s* in the encoding, and it ends with 1;
> >so you can append an additional 1 and thus make it a prefix code.
> >
> >result: 00100011
> >
> >IIRC this encoding is asimptotically optimal.
>
> This may be asimptotically optimal for certain cases. But
> it is not optimal if you have a set of data and which to add
> a pointer to one of the data bytes my DSC program is optimal
> for that use.
> it at my site on the compression pages.
Mr. DS, it makes no sense whatsoever to say it "may be" asymptotically
optimal. It either is or it isn't. In point of fact, if I remember the
math for fibonacci sequences correctly, for increasingly large numbers,
the length of this representation of a number approaches a small
constant (approaching 1) factor of the length of the binary
representation of the number.
Also, if the "pointer" you are talking about is in some cases a large
number, and in some cases a small number, then a variable length
representation is optimal. In your DSC program, how is the pointer
stored? As a fixed sized integer, in base 128, in base 255, using a
fibonacci coding, or something else? *What* the integer means isn't
particularly important to this discussion, but *how* it's stored on the
stream/in the file *is*.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Storing an Integer on a stream
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:25:53 GMT
Andras Erdei wrote:
>
> Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
[snip]
> The method i like most is fibonacci coding:
>
> - start with the largest fib number smaller than your integer
>
> - if the current fib number is smaller than your number
> substitute it and write down 1
> else
> write down 0
> - take the next fib number
>
> Example:
>
> number: 15
> fib: 1,1,2,3,5,8,13
> encoding: 13+2 -> 0010001
>
> This way you encoded your (arbitrarily big number) in a way that
> there are *no consecutive 1s* in the encoding, and it ends with 1;
> so you can append an additional 1 and thus make it a prefix code.
>
> result: 00100011
>
> IIRC this encoding is asimptotically optimal.
Cool! I like that. However, just one question... since fib sequences
begin with two "1" values, won't the first bit *always* be 0? Couldn't
we omit writing it, to save a bit of space?
[snip]
> You didn't mention what encryption are you planning to use,
> so it's hard to tell whether it does matter that the file always
> starts with some 0s.
It's a good idea to *always* assume that any known or probable plaintext
is bad.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Idea for Twofish and Serpent Teams
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:26:12 GMT
JPeschel wrote:
>
> Benjamin Goldberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> >JPeschel wrote:
> >> Runu Knips writes:
> >> >Helger Lipmaa wrote:
> >> >> There was a thread recently in this newsgroup, about the general
> >> >> attitude that guys who understand nothing about security try to
> >> >> strut and to demand and to insult those who know better.
> >> >
> >> >Tom might insult people unnecessarily in this NG, but
> >> >AFAIK he's far from being a 'guy who understand nothing
> >> >about security' !
> >>
> >> Much of what Tom posts is insulting, patronzing, wrong or
> >> exaggerated.
> >
> >You sure you're not confusing Tom with David Scott?
>
> No. David Scott has been posting here a lot longer, and doesn't
> use commas. I can see why you might confuse the two, though:
> they're a lot alike, but don't like each other. One is an old cat
> like me, and, also like me, not about to change; the other is
> young enough to decide not to grow up to be like his nemesis.
You forgot to mention that Tom has analysis (sp? plural of analysis(n.))
of most [all?] of his own ciphers, while Mr. DS doesn't believe in
analyzing his ciphers, but simply saying that they're not breakable.
Also, when asked to explain something, Tom attempts to do so, so far as
I've seen. Mr. DS tell people to look at his source code if they ask
how something works, rather than giving an explanation. DS tends to
post things that are insulting, patronizing, wrong or exaggerated
(especially in response to things I've posted), but I haven't ever
gotten that type of reply from Tom.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Storing an Integer on a stream
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:26:56 GMT
SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Benjamin Goldberg) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> You can use my DSC program.
> >
> >If I could find it. You didn't give a URL.
>
> SORRY http://members.xoom.com/ecil/compres8.htm
>
> >> If the file data is in whole bytes. and the padding starts on a
> >> word boudary.
> >
> >That sentence no verb.
> >
> >> You can use my code without any modification at all. However the
> >> format of your file would have to change. Instead of a length
> >> field followed by data followed by random padding.
> >
> >This sentence also no verb.
>
> But where you able to figure it out?
Could talk way that wanted to if I, but look like imbecile would.
> >> You would have the data followed by random padding followed by a
> >> pointer that points to the start of the random padding.
> >
> >In terms of amount of information, there is no difference between
> >length + data + padding and data + padding + length. Also, either
> >way, I asked how write a length value as some number of bytes. My
> >post was asking what is the best way to do that.
>
> Good the code does that.
It would be nice, if you said HOW the code does that. I'm writing this
message offline, and won't have the opportunity to look at the web page
until my parents don't need the phone line. Describing how the integer
is stored would be much more intelligent than telling me to look at the
code. Also, what proof do you have that your way is BEST, hmm?
For the 4 methods discussed so far (fixed # of bits, base 255, base 128,
fibbonacci), each of them has a particular range of values / set of
conditions where they are optimal. Consider that the fib encoding
produces a bit string, and won't always be a multiple of 8 bits: If we
are immediately following it with compressed data (the output of a
huffman or arithmetic encoder), then the fact that it doesn't end on a
byte boundary is not particularly important. If a fib encoded integer
is followed by data that needs to be interpreted as bytes, then there's
a 7/8 chance that we'll waste part of a byte (or else have to shift all
following data 1..7 bits, which would be computationally expensive). In
that scenario, one of the other 3 formats would be better, since they
*do* use an integral number of 8-bit bytes.
What method of encoding does your DSC program use?
> >> You have all the information of the first file in a form that is
> >> better suited for encryption.
> >
> >What proof do you have that your method is better suited than mine?
> >I'm not saying it isn't, but I want to know what basis you use to
> >make this assertion. If I were stating something were better, I
> >would usually add "IMHO" or (in your case) "IMNSHO." Stating an
> >opinion as a fact, and not offering evidence to back it up makes you
> >look like an ass.
>
> The proof is this. THe data combining is bijective to the set
> of all binary files.
There is no PROOF that bijectiveness enhances security. It might in
fact do so, but then again, it might not.
> Meaning you take any 8bit byte type of file run it through UNDSC
> and you get a data file with a intger in the range of 0 to N-1
> where N is the Length of file. Just check it out my explaining
> not as good as the simple examples.
>
> >Thus, your method of writing the padding length at the end of the
> >file, instead of writing the data length at the front, doesn't work
> >at all if the length of the padding is variable, and only works if
> >the number is written as a fixed number of bytes (or bits).
>
> Really?
You sound unsure. Think of it this way, you want:
length(data) + length(padding) + length(length(padding)) = N
Where N is a multiple of your cipher's block length. Suppose that the
block length is 128 bits, and your data is length 128x+1. That means
that length(padding) + length(length(padding)) should be 127. Now
suppose that under some particular variable length encoding, the integer
120 takes 8 bits to write, and the integer 119 takes 7 bits to write.
In neither case, can we get add precisely 127 bits to the data, only 126
or 128.
>
> >> If you don't like this rearangement of format you can edit DSC to
> >> make it fit what you want. The source code is included.
> >
> >IF your method does something other than one of those things I
> >described above, I would appreciate a URL.
>
> You have it above. You may have to modify it slightly you will
> get a better idea when you look at code anad examples its all
> there. Just but more faith in the code than any verbal explantion
> that I might have added.
If you can't explain the algorithm, why should I have any faith at all
in the code? For that matter, if you can't explain it, why should I
even believe that you wrote it? You might have stolen it and claimed
that it's yours, for all I know.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pencil and paper cipher.
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:27:07 GMT
John Savard wrote:
>
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 01:59:23 GMT, Benjamin Goldberg
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>
> >3) Move the first digit to the end of the message.
>
> >4) Convert digit pairs back to letters. See a and b in step 2.
>
> That basic principle was mentioned in David Kahn's "The Codebreakers"
> as a common amateur system. If the only key is the code for converting
> letters to digits and back again, one attack is to treat the message
> as a homophonic cipher in which letter pairs represent letters, as
> noted in "Decrypted Secrets" by Bauer.
Ok, a simple circular shift of digits is weak, but what about doing a
slightly more complex transposition on digits? Consider the following:
1) Use a keyed substitution to convert from letters to GF(5^2).
2) Split into 3rds, write in 3 rows, then read down the columns.
3) Use a keyed substitution to convert from GF(5^2) to letters.
Better than 3rds might be to use floor(sqrt(message length)), but that
might be awkward.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES?
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:27:14 GMT
John Savard wrote:
> JCA wrote:
> >Roger Schlafly wrote:
> >> JCA wrote:
> >> > UBCHI2 wrote:
> >> > > Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES?
> >> > Because it was the worst candidate by a mile?
> >> It was designed by a committee at IBM.
> >
> > My comment was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek
> >one, and so may be yours. In case it isn't, the fact
> >that there is a big company behind it doesn't
> >guarantee its quality.
>
> Yes, there is the old saying about a camel being a horse designed by a
> committee.
I'd like to see you design a horse that can survive in the desert for x
weeks without water, and not come up with a camel. Just because
something is designed by committee, doesn't guarantee that it will be
useless. OTOH, I wouldn't use a camel outside of the specific (desert)
environment that it's designed for. I'm certain that there are
situations in which MARS is the best thing to use (not that I can think
of any offhand).
> Seriously, it was good in some ways, but Rijndael was good in the ways
> that were considered important.
--
"Mulder, do you remember when I was missing -- that time that you
*still* insist I was being held aboard a UFO?"
"How could I forget?"
"Well, I'm beginning to wonder if maybe I wouldn't have been
better off staying abo-- I mean, wherever it was that I was
being held." [from an untitled spamfic by [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (daniel mcgrath)
Crossposted-To: rec.puzzles
Subject: Cryptograms Reposted -- PLEASE RESPOND
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:37:12 GMT
On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 23:15:18 +0000, Jim Gillogly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>daniel mcgrath wrote:
>> ADDENDUM FOR SECOND POSTING OF MESSAGE
>>
>> Why is Jim Gillogly so often not responding to my posts regarding the
>> cryptograms? I have even been sending these messages to him as e-mail
>> AS WELL AS posting them and he STILL won't saying anything. Where is
>> he? I wish he would respond!!!
>
>Everybody has lots of projects they're working on, some free and some
>for money. I was interested in your problem and worked on it for a
>while, made some observations and some progress, and set it aside.
>My comments on your cryptograms do not entitle you to further comments --
>if I get around to it I may look at it again with the further hints,
>unless somebody else cracks it first. But unless I'm getting paid
>I work on my own schedule on the things that interest me at the time.
>In particular, your posting of cryptogram challenges is not a contest
>between you and me.
Well, Jim, since I want to see *someone* make guesses and try to solve
the two long cryptograms, I have posted them again -- to rec.puzzles
and to sci.crypt as well (where there would be more expert
cryptologists). (The subject line is "Tysoizbyjoxs! Can you solve
these extremely difficult cryptograms?") I didn't want to go through
the whole series of hints again, so I asked them to go the Deja.com
archive. To my surprise, I did not get a single response (it's been
over a week). Why? It seems that you might in fact be the only one
interested in these cryptograms.
==================================================
daniel g. mcgrath
a subscriber to _word ways: the journal of recreational linguistics_
http://www.wordways.com/
------------------------------
From: Roger Schlafly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why wasn't MARS chosen as AES?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 18:43:05 -0700
Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> I'm certain that there are
> situations in which MARS is the best thing to use (not that I can think
> of any offhand).
Yes. I didn't mean to completely dis Mars. No doubt it was
well-analyzed and suitable for a lot of purposes.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
