Cryptography-Digest Digest #94, Volume #14 Fri, 6 Apr 01 16:13:01 EDT
Contents:
Re: Dynamic Substitution Question (John Savard)
Re: Data dependent arcfour via sbox feedback (John Savard)
Re: AES VS. DES (John Savard)
Re: patent issue ("Douglas A. Gwyn")
Re: AES VS. DES ("Douglas A. Gwyn")
Re: SHA PRNG (Volker Hetzer)
Re: patent issue ("Tom St Denis")
Re: SHA PRNG ("Tom St Denis")
Re: AES VS. DES (Volker Hetzer)
Re: Dynamic Substitution Question (newbie)
An idea on the blind signature with EC. ("Cristiano")
Re: I got accepted (Mike Rosing)
Re: rc4 without sbox swapping/updating (Bill Unruh)
Re: I got accepted (Paul Rubin)
Re: I got accepted ("Tom St Denis")
Re: I got accepted ("Tom St Denis")
Re: patent issue (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: patent issue ("Tom St Denis")
Re: patent issue (Mok-Kong Shen)
Re: patent issue ("Tom St Denis")
Re: SHA PRNG ("Dobs")
Re: Dynamic Substitution Question (John Savard)
Re: Dynamic Substitution Question (John Savard)
Re: rc4 without sbox swapping/updating (Jerry Coffin)
Re: I got accepted (John Joseph Trammell)
Re: SHA PRNG ("Tom St Denis")
Re: Dynamic Substitution Question (newbie)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: Dynamic Substitution Question
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:39:18 GMT
On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 08:53:35 -0300, newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote, in part:
>What is Dynamic Substitution?
>OTP is not dynamic substitution?
>Vigenere is not dynamic substitution?
>Can someone give a sample of dynamic substitution?
Dynamic Substitution is a very specific algorithm, invented by Terry
Ritter. The pseudocode example given does illustrate a valid case of
it; his response was simply that his patent is broader than the
preferred implementation of the principle.
Essentially, Dynamic Substitution is a method of applying a keystream
(PRNG output) to plaintext to generate ciphertext. This is called a
combiner. OTP and Vigenere use simple addition or XOR as their
combiners.
Dynamic Substitution works differently.
The plaintext is replaced by its equivalent in a table to form the
ciphertext.
Then, the keystream character is used to indicate which entry in the
table the entry that was used to encipher the plaintext will be
swapped with.
This has two benefits:
- entries in the table are only used once before being scrambled, so
information about the table at one point is not as useful in
determining anything about other characters enciphered, and
- the effects of keystream characters don't show up immediately, but
at later, variable, times in the ciphertext.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: Data dependent arcfour via sbox feedback
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:42:47 GMT
On Thu, 05 Apr 2001 07:23:55 GMT, Benjamin Goldberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>Thus, key feedback mode can be
>considered prior art to Dynamic Substitution.
Only prior art to the broader interpretations of the patent. And the
Phillips cipher from Gaines could be considered prior art to such
extremely broad interpretations as well.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: AES VS. DES
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:03:35 GMT
On Mon, 02 Apr 2001 05:59:45 GMT, Benjamin Goldberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>DES uses a Feistel structure, AES uses a ... I dunno what it's called,
>precisely, it's wierd :)
True, it doesn't have a name just yet.
But in a way, it is _less_ weird than the way DES does it.
SAFER uses a straight confusion/diffusion structure, where one has a
confusion part where the data goes through S-boxes and has subkey
information added or XORed in, and a diffusion part with interlaced
PHT steps.
One way to think of Rijndael would be to think of it as analogous to
enciphering eight blocks at once in SAFER, but after each round,
shifting bytes between the blocks, so that in the next round, each
block consists of one byte from each of the blocks in the previous
round.
So we can call it a confusion/diffusion structure, with separate local
and global diffusion layers.
It _is_ nice to have names for things.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:23:03 GMT
Tom St Denis wrote:
> The problem is when non-profit tasks require the device/algorithm etc...
Is there supposed to be something sacred about a "need" when no profit
is involved? You can contact the holder of the rights and request that
he grant you free use; sometimes he will -- but the point of a *right*
is that he gets to choose how to deploy his own invention. Patents in
the US (at least) require that the invention be disclosed and reasonable
licensing be made available, which is a condition imposed in exchange
for the special protection made available under patent law.
------------------------------
From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AES VS. DES
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:29:56 GMT
"SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY" wrote:
> Maybe the defination of a break should be changed.
My idea of a "break" into crypto algorithm is a method that can be
used against real-world applications to recover enough information
to justify the cost of doing so.
------------------------------
From: Volker Hetzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SHA PRNG
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:32:55 +0200
Tom St Denis wrote:
> Well I would recommend flushing the prng every so often and espescially
> before making long term keys. That way there is less of a risk.
Btw, has anybody managed to get Bruce Schneier's Yarrow-paper *with the pictures*?
Greetings!
Volker
--
They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Copernicus. They laughed at
Columbus. But remember, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:21:12 GMT
"Douglas A. Gwyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> > The problem is when non-profit tasks require the device/algorithm etc...
>
> Is there supposed to be something sacred about a "need" when no profit
> is involved? You can contact the holder of the rights and request that
> he grant you free use; sometimes he will -- but the point of a *right*
> is that he gets to choose how to deploy his own invention. Patents in
> the US (at least) require that the invention be disclosed and reasonable
> licensing be made available, which is a condition imposed in exchange
> for the special protection made available under patent law.
Patents are just a way to hold someone liable for being creative.
Yeah I agree one should ask permission before using someone elses idea(s).
But the "money" aspect is just an example of how primitive men(and women)
still are.
Tom
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SHA PRNG
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:21:49 GMT
"Volker Hetzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> > Well I would recommend flushing the prng every so often and espescially
> > before making long term keys. That way there is less of a risk.
>
> Btw, has anybody managed to get Bruce Schneier's Yarrow-paper *with the
pictures*?
Yarrow is just an example of my 2nd hash mode PRNG (see my original reply).
In the case of Yarrow they use a block cipher instead of a hash to randomize
the bianry counter.
Tom
------------------------------
From: Volker Hetzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AES VS. DES
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:45:50 +0200
"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
>
> "SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY" wrote:
> > Maybe the defination of a break should be changed.
>
> My idea of a "break" into crypto algorithm is a method that can be
> used against real-world applications to recover enough information
> to justify the cost of doing so.
Personally I believe that, for each break, there is an application that
cannot be created because of it.
Greetings!
Volker
--
They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Copernicus. They laughed at
Columbus. But remember, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
------------------------------
From: newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dynamic Substitution Question
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 13:40:42 -0300
Please give me just a numeric sample.
Because I don't see where is the novelty comparing to Vernam Cipher.
Addition is not a table?
Xor is not a table?
I don't see what is specific.
I read the article DS written by Ritter.
John Savard wrote:
>
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 08:53:35 -0300, newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote, in part:
>
> >What is Dynamic Substitution?
> >OTP is not dynamic substitution?
> >Vigenere is not dynamic substitution?
> >Can someone give a sample of dynamic substitution?
>
> Dynamic Substitution is a very specific algorithm, invented by Terry
> Ritter. The pseudocode example given does illustrate a valid case of
> it; his response was simply that his patent is broader than the
> preferred implementation of the principle.
>
> Essentially, Dynamic Substitution is a method of applying a keystream
> (PRNG output) to plaintext to generate ciphertext. This is called a
> combiner. OTP and Vigenere use simple addition or XOR as their
> combiners.
>
> Dynamic Substitution works differently.
>
> The plaintext is replaced by its equivalent in a table to form the
> ciphertext.
>
> Then, the keystream character is used to indicate which entry in the
> table the entry that was used to encipher the plaintext will be
> swapped with.
>
> This has two benefits:
>
> - entries in the table are only used once before being scrambled, so
> information about the table at one point is not as useful in
> determining anything about other characters enciphered, and
>
> - the effects of keystream characters don't show up immediately, but
> at later, variable, times in the ciphertext.
>
> John Savard
> http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: "Cristiano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: An idea on the blind signature with EC.
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:33:23 +0200
Thank to the answer of Dr. Mike, I have elaborated a system for blind
signature with elliptic curves and I would like to have some comments.
>From Dr. Mike answer:
" [...]
X = M + e*R, T = d*X = d*(M + e*R) = R + d*M.
Alice can compute s = T - R.
Now, this requires n to be a composite with 2 large primes. finding such a
curve is
hard [...]".
It's clear that the problem is to send to A "e" (the inverse of d modulo n)
because A can compute B's private key (d) by simply doing e^-1 mod n (n is
prime).
Thus my idea is simply to blind d^-1 mod n with ECES:
P=base point; n=prime order of P; k=random integer 1<k<n;
QB=B's public key; dB=B's private key.
1) B compute only once: Q1=k*P; Q2=k*QB; s=x(Q2)/dB mod n
2) B send to A Q1 and s;
3) A map the message to point M and send to B the point
X=M+s*R; (R is a random secret point)
4) B send to A T=dB/x(Q2)*X;
5) A can compute the signature S=T-R=dB/x(Q2)*M.
When A want to use the signature she sends to B: S and M; B verify S by
doing Q2=dB*Q1, V=dB/x(Q2)*M. If S=V then the message is good.
This work in practice, but in theory?
To avoid B to track A, Q1 must be fixed but I think this is not a big
problem.
In step 1, 4 and 5 may be better to do T=dB xor x(Q2)*X?
I really appreciate some comment.
Cristiano
------------------------------
From: Mike Rosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I got accepted
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 12:43:00 -0500
Tom St Denis wrote:
>
> Yahooooooo!
>
> I got accepted to 1 out of the 3 (so far) universities I applied too.
> Yahooooo!
>
> I would like to thank the posters in this group for if it weren't for my
> hours consumed posting and learning here I probably would not have made
> it!!!
Congratulations Tom! Now you get to study instead of post :-) Good luck on
being able to have a choice!
Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: rc4 without sbox swapping/updating
Date: 6 Apr 2001 18:10:04 GMT
In <9akroa$9b3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Simon Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> "The combiner can also be used to combine two pseudo-random confusion
>> streams into a more-complex confusion stream. In this case, extraction
>> may be unnecessary and so the combiner substitution tables need not be
>> invertible."
Ie, ONLY in the case where two pseudo-random streams are combined need it
not be invertible. Also it strikes me that Knuth book on random number
genreation already did this in the 70s
>> The desirability of having non-invertible substitution tables is thus
>> part of the patent text. Absent a specific restriction otherwise in
>> the claim, that is what it may be. Any interpretation otherwise is
>> just silly.
There is a specific restriction-- "In this case"
>> There simply can be no question about whether non-permutations were
>> considered acceptable in tables as part of the patent.
"In this case"
>>
>> Since table contents are specifically allowed to be non-permutations,
ONLY in the case where two or more streams are combined.
------------------------------
From: Paul Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I got accepted
Date: 06 Apr 2001 11:28:11 -0700
Hey, congratulations Tom! You're going to be a math major of course ;-)
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I got accepted
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:35:34 GMT
"Paul Rubin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hey, congratulations Tom! You're going to be a math major of course ;-)
Nope comp.sci. Math is not my strong suit although is required :-)
Thanks,
Tom
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I got accepted
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:35:57 GMT
"Mike Rosing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> >
> > Yahooooooo!
> >
> > I got accepted to 1 out of the 3 (so far) universities I applied too.
> > Yahooooo!
> >
> > I would like to thank the posters in this group for if it weren't for my
> > hours consumed posting and learning here I probably would not have made
> > it!!!
>
> Congratulations Tom! Now you get to study instead of post :-) Good luck
on
> being able to have a choice!
Nah the more I learn the more I will post and publish (??? who knows it may
happen)
Tom
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 20:51:56 +0200
Tom St Denis wrote:
>
> Patents are just a way to hold someone liable for being creative.
That's your and some others' viewpoint. There are definitely
other (differing) viewpoints. I don't think it is good that
one goes too deep into politics/philosophy here.
> Yeah I agree one should ask permission before using someone elses idea(s).
> But the "money" aspect is just an example of how primitive men(and women)
> still are.
I suppose you are so young that you haven't yet earned your
salaries in any professional situations. I recommend that
you give your opinions on money after you have finished your
education and started the first concrete step in your proper
profession work, not now. Sorry for employing such 'direct'
words.
M. K. Shen
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:09:10 GMT
"Mok-Kong Shen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> >
> > Patents are just a way to hold someone liable for being creative.
>
> That's your and some others' viewpoint. There are definitely
> other (differing) viewpoints. I don't think it is good that
> one goes too deep into politics/philosophy here.
>
> > Yeah I agree one should ask permission before using someone elses
idea(s).
> > But the "money" aspect is just an example of how primitive men(and
women)
> > still are.
>
> I suppose you are so young that you haven't yet earned your
> salaries in any professional situations. I recommend that
> you give your opinions on money after you have finished your
> education and started the first concrete step in your proper
> profession work, not now. Sorry for employing such 'direct'
> words.
Actually I already have a job as a R&D programmer. It's not a huge job but
work none the less. Although I acknowledge that money is required to live
in this primitive buzzword slinging society, I still don't agree money is a
good thing.
Just like slavery was acknolwedged practive at one time but that didn't mean
some people didn't like the idea. Now we replace "money" with "slavery" and
we relieve a 200 year old history lesson first hand.
Tom
------------------------------
From: Mok-Kong Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 21:16:39 +0200
Tom St Denis wrote:
>
> "Mok-Kong Shen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tom St Denis wrote:
> > >
> > > Patents are just a way to hold someone liable for being creative.
> >
> > That's your and some others' viewpoint. There are definitely
> > other (differing) viewpoints. I don't think it is good that
> > one goes too deep into politics/philosophy here.
> >
> > > Yeah I agree one should ask permission before using someone elses
> idea(s).
> > > But the "money" aspect is just an example of how primitive men(and
> women)
> > > still are.
> >
> > I suppose you are so young that you haven't yet earned your
> > salaries in any professional situations. I recommend that
> > you give your opinions on money after you have finished your
> > education and started the first concrete step in your proper
> > profession work, not now. Sorry for employing such 'direct'
> > words.
>
> Actually I already have a job as a R&D programmer. It's not a huge job but
> work none the less. Although I acknowledge that money is required to live
> in this primitive buzzword slinging society, I still don't agree money is a
> good thing.
>
> Just like slavery was acknolwedged practive at one time but that didn't mean
> some people didn't like the idea. Now we replace "money" with "slavery" and
> we relieve a 200 year old history lesson first hand.
So what genious proposals do you have to dispose of money?
I certainly wouldn't exclude that you or other people are
capable of writing big books with all the wonderful
theories that lead to a reform/revolution of the society.
But this group, sci.crypt, is definitely not the place for
such stuffs.
M. K. Shen
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patent issue
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:24:45 GMT
"Mok-Kong Shen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> >
> > "Mok-Kong Shen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Tom St Denis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Patents are just a way to hold someone liable for being creative.
> > >
> > > That's your and some others' viewpoint. There are definitely
> > > other (differing) viewpoints. I don't think it is good that
> > > one goes too deep into politics/philosophy here.
> > >
> > > > Yeah I agree one should ask permission before using someone elses
> > idea(s).
> > > > But the "money" aspect is just an example of how primitive men(and
> > women)
> > > > still are.
> > >
> > > I suppose you are so young that you haven't yet earned your
> > > salaries in any professional situations. I recommend that
> > > you give your opinions on money after you have finished your
> > > education and started the first concrete step in your proper
> > > profession work, not now. Sorry for employing such 'direct'
> > > words.
> >
> > Actually I already have a job as a R&D programmer. It's not a huge job
but
> > work none the less. Although I acknowledge that money is required to
live
> > in this primitive buzzword slinging society, I still don't agree money
is a
> > good thing.
> >
> > Just like slavery was acknolwedged practive at one time but that didn't
mean
> > some people didn't like the idea. Now we replace "money" with "slavery"
and
> > we relieve a 200 year old history lesson first hand.
>
> So what genious proposals do you have to dispose of money?
> I certainly wouldn't exclude that you or other people are
> capable of writing big books with all the wonderful
> theories that lead to a reform/revolution of the society.
> But this group, sci.crypt, is definitely not the place for
> such stuffs.
Hey, I am just a cowardly idea dude. I wouldn't write a book on the subject
where the likely result is a crucifiction.
But you are right, this is OT. Sorry sci.crypt dudes.
Tom
------------------------------
From: "Dobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SHA PRNG
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 21:23:40 +0200
But what is R || C ????????
and how to gather as much entropy I can from my environment?
U�ytkownik Tom St Denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w wiadomo�ci do grup
dyskusyjnych napisa�:Eqmz6.37216$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Dobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:9akp9p$gep$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Could U describe me this algorithm more precisaly please::))))))))) I am
> > beginner :(((((
>
> Sure.
>
> >
> > 1. Make up a random string R and a binary counter C
> > 2. Get T = HASH(R || C)
> > 3. Increment C
> > 4. Output T and goto 2 as required.
> >
> >
> > 1. Just generate random string R like
> > 466edfdffghk3m32b773lg74hg73273l4ffjlkl6636546 ????????
>
> Well you gather as much entropy you can from your environment.
>
> > ,what is binary counter C???
>
> A binary counter is just a t-bit counter that goes up.. i.e in C that's
just
>
> long x;
> x = x + 1;
>
> > 2. Counte T=HASH(R|| C) waht is R||C , what HASH will be doing
> > 3. ok just increse the C
> > 4. Here we have a loop, but how long will this algorithm work
>
> Well it depends. If you are going to make a new long term key you may
want
> to flush the prng and restart it. etc..
>
> Tom
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: Dynamic Substitution Question
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:45:00 GMT
On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 13:40:42 -0300, newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote, in part:
>Please give me just a numeric sample.
>Because I don't see where is the novelty comparing to Vernam Cipher.
>Addition is not a table?
>Xor is not a table?
>I don't see what is specific.
>I read the article DS written by Ritter.
The OTP -
Plaintext: 43190247
Keystream: 17098162
Ciphertext: 50188309
Dynamic Substitution:
Initial state of table:
0123456789
----------
5290713468
Plaintext: 4 3 1 9 0 2 4 7
Keystream: 1 7 0 9 8 1 6
Table: 0|5 5 5>7 7>6 6 6
1|2>7 7>5 5 5>9 9
2|9 9 9 9 9 9>5 5
3|0 0>4 4 4 4 4 4
4|7>2 2 2 2 2 2>3
5|1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6|3 3 3 3 3 3 3>2
7|4 4>0 0 0 0 0 0
8|6 6 6 6 6>7 7 7
9|8 8 8 8>8 8 8 8
Ciphertext: 7 0 7 8 7 9 2 0
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Savard)
Subject: Re: Dynamic Substitution Question
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 19:35:56 GMT
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:11:19 GMT, "John L. Allen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, in part:
>Don't forget to include all the income you made from Dynamic Substitution
>patent infringement lawsuit victories.
>:-)
That was unkind.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
From: Jerry Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rc4 without sbox swapping/updating
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:55:13 -0600
In article <9akroa$9b3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon.Johnson6
@btinternet.com says...
[ ... ]
> Hrm, what a mess... Why didn't u define your ideas in maths?
Probably because patent law requires that it be explained in a way
that's understandable to a person of "ordinary skill in the art."
Given that we're talking about something like to be implemented as a
computer program, that more or less translates to describing it so
just about any Joe Sixpack programmer can implement his invention.
Describing it in a mathematical formula probably doesn't do that.
> If patent laws were designed by people to serve for the people, then if
> no-one except a select few can understand them, then are they serving the
> people or themselves?
I'm reasonably certain most people COULD understand patent law fairly
easily. The problem isn't that only a few CAN understand, but that
only a few have ever even bothered to try.
And yes, laws can serve people who don't understand them thoroughly
or even at all. If somebody broke into my house to steal my property
I guess I'm not sure whether that would be burglary or breaking &
Entering combined with robbery, or maybe something else.
Nonetheless, I can feel reasonably secure about it being against at
least some law.
> If Ken can't understand what he can or can't use in his modifications to RC4
> by just reading your document then it is waste of time.
Terry's quoted parts of his patent that make it quite clear that if
Ken had bothered to actually read what it said at all, he COULD have
done so. It's hard to believe that he could have read the patent (or
even just the abstract of the patent) and then make the excuses he
did.
> Its clear, no matter how long we argue about this, no-one really has a clear
> idea what your patent is means and a large fraction of us probably don't
> care wether they infringe on a patent or not...
Good lord: the patent says that the tables may or may not be
invertible, and you're claiming that nobody can figure out whether or
not they can be invertible? That sounds downright ridiculous to me.
I'll admit that there ARE times it can get tricky, but this doesn't
even sound close to one of those times to me.
--
Later,
Jerry.
The Universe is a figment of its own imagination.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Joseph Trammell)
Subject: Re: I got accepted
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 20:00:40 GMT
On 06 Apr 2001 11:28:11 -0700, Paul Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey, congratulations Tom! You're going to be a math major of course ;-)
More likely he'll go into patent law. :-)
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SHA PRNG
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 20:04:02 GMT
"Dobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:9al529$mvo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> But what is R || C ????????
typically || means to concatenate.
> and how to gather as much entropy I can from my environment?
I would suggest you read up some papers on crypto :-) Try reading HAC and
Applied Crypto.
Tom
------------------------------
From: newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dynamic Substitution Question
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:01:59 -0300
Thank you for your useful and clear answer.
But replacing a keysteam (OTP) by "complicated" combination of two keys
( keystream and dynamic table) does not give more randomness.
If you prouve that it is the case, I will agree with you on a novelty of
DS.
If not, it's only reinventing the wheel.
John Savard wrote:
>
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 13:40:42 -0300, newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote, in part:
>
> >Please give me just a numeric sample.
> >Because I don't see where is the novelty comparing to Vernam Cipher.
> >Addition is not a table?
> >Xor is not a table?
> >I don't see what is specific.
> >I read the article DS written by Ritter.
>
> The OTP -
>
> Plaintext: 43190247
> Keystream: 17098162
> Ciphertext: 50188309
>
> Dynamic Substitution:
>
> Initial state of table:
> 0123456789
> ----------
> 5290713468
>
> Plaintext: 4 3 1 9 0 2 4 7
> Keystream: 1 7 0 9 8 1 6
> Table: 0|5 5 5>7 7>6 6 6
> 1|2>7 7>5 5 5>9 9
> 2|9 9 9 9 9 9>5 5
> 3|0 0>4 4 4 4 4 4
> 4|7>2 2 2 2 2 2>3
> 5|1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
> 6|3 3 3 3 3 3 3>2
> 7|4 4>0 0 0 0 0 0
> 8|6 6 6 6 6>7 7 7
> 9|8 8 8 8>8 8 8 8
> Ciphertext: 7 0 7 8 7 9 2 0
>
> John Savard
> http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to sci.crypt.
End of Cryptography-Digest Digest
******************************
