Cryptography-Digest Digest #273, Volume #14 Mon, 30 Apr 01 17:13:00 EDT
Contents:
Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop (Leonard R. Budney)
Re: MS OSs "swap" file: total breach of computer security. ("Christian Bohn")
Re: Secure Digital Music Initiative cracked? ("M.S. Bob")
Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A keen symmetric cipher idea ("M.S. Bob")
Re: A keen symmetric cipher idea ("Tom St Denis")
Re: DSA in GF(2^W)? ("M.S. Bob")
Encryption and decryption in VHDL ("kris")
CryptDisk (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jacques_Th=E9riault?=)
Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop (Leonard R. Budney)
Best, Strongest Algorithm ("Ryan M. McConahy")
Re: They seem to know something... Look ("Ryan M. McConahy")
Re: Announcing A New Rijndael Encryption Algorithm Implementation ("Ryan M.
McConahy")
Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm (Leonard R. Budney)
Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm ("M.S. Bob")
Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm (SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY)
Re: DSA in GF(2^W)? ("Roger Schlafly")
Re: Announcing A New Rijndael Encryption Algorithm Implementation (Mathew Hendry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leonard R. Budney)
Date: 30 Apr 2001 14:55:12 -0400
Paul Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leonard R. Budney) writes:
>> The premise behind copyright law is that people are entitled to
>> profit from their *creativity*, where creativity is defined to be
>> "a specific work having some original content".
>
> You're assuming a motivation behind copyright without providing evidence
> to justify the assumption. So your argument is weak because your starting
> premise is weak.
The above is an assertion, not an argument. If the assertion is not
axiomatic for you, then we have bigger problems to work out, commie!
>> ...the most basic issues: If you make a suggestion to your boss, and
>> he passes it up the chain with his name on it, winning promotions and
>> accolades, then HE DONE YOU WRONG. Why, you ask? After all, aren't
>> ideas free? Doesn't knowledge belong to everyone? Do you really "own"
>> your suggestion?
>
> If the issues are so deep, then why are you acting like they're so
> simple?
Read it again. Notice the phrase "the most basic issues". Not all issues
here are deep. It is not deep to realize that people are entitled to enjoy
the fruits of their labor, whether the labor is physical or intellectual.
The "deep issues" revolve around exactly how to apply that in practice.
(Personally, the most interesting ones revolve around questions like
"lending". I can lend a book; I can lend a CD; but...if I lend an MP3, I
can still listen to it! I can lend it to dozens of people at once! Now I
do have legal MP3's, and I may loan them. But stocking a music store with
MP3s downloaded free off the Internet is clearly unethical. Interesting
issue to ponder.)
>> Epsilon-cost duplication calls the adequacy of those protections into
>> question in several ways. But the need for it cannot be denied.
>
> Oh yeah? ;-)
You, I, and everyone else will take to yak-herding if we can't be paid
to use our brains. Intellectual products, while intangible, are real
and deserve recognition as such. Do you really dispute that?
Len.
--
What gives you the idea that the Putnam problems are written carefully?
-- Dan Bernstein
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Christian Bohn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Christian Bohn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.crypto,alt.hacker
Subject: Re: MS OSs "swap" file: total breach of computer security.
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:07:33 +0200
But what about the PAGE_NOCACHE protection flag that can be used together
with VirtualAlloc, VirtualProtect?
>From MSDN :
PAGE_NOCACHE Allows no caching of the committed regions of pages. The
hardware attributes for the physical memory should be specified as "no
cache." This is not recommended for general usage. It is useful for device
drivers; for example, mapping a video frame buffer with no caching. This
value is a page protection modifier, and it is only valid when used with one
of the page protections other than PAGE_NOACCESS.
According to the documentation, VirtualAlloc and VirtualProtect are both
supported by Win95/NT. Wouldn't it be possible to make it non pageable this
way? Or are you saying that it is only possible to allocate memory from the
non-pageable pool using Ring0?
Christian
------------------------------
From: "M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Secure Digital Music Initiative cracked?
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:07:41 +0100
"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
>
> David A Molnar wrote:
> > ... It still shocks me that the RIAA can do what the NSA did not -
> > prevent a paper from being presented at a public conference.
>
> Actually the paper you're thinking of was the subject of personal
> attention by an NSA employee working outside the proper scope of
> his duties, and the Agency didn't back him up. But anyway, the
For the benefit of others, I assume that Mr. Gwyn is referring to events
in 1977.
A mysterious "J. A. Meyer" wrote a letter dated July 7, 1977 to the
staff director of the IEEE's publications board alleging that the IEEE
had possibly exposed itself to ITAR by publishing material about
encryption.
After some searching it appears that Joseph A. Meyer worked for the NSA,
but wrote the letter unofficial, perhaps intending to be a helpful
warning to the IEEE. Nothing much came of it, other than the IEEE, MIT,
and Stanford looked at whether they were at risk or not. Eventual
everyone just carried on, and no legal action from the NSA happened.
Source: Crypto, Steven Levy pg. 109-110
I hope that this affair with the SDMI and the RIAA has the same effect,
perhaps delaying publication, forcing us to learn our rights to conduct
research, but after a while everyone in the cryptology and computer
security communities carries on, having done a bit of navel glazing to
familiarize ourselves with our freedoms to publish and engage in
academic open research. Including further research of fielded
proprietary systems, with or without the consent of the technologies
owners. I feel that such research does have the same protection as
investigative journalism, Consumers Report, and Lemonaid (an independent
publication evaluating cars).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop
Date: 30 Apr 2001 19:32:45 GMT
Leonard R. Budney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) writes:
>> Copyright says nothing about ideas and offers ideas no protection
>> whatsoever.
> True enough; I'm speaking English, not legalese. The premise behind
> copyright law is that people are entitled to profit from their
> *creativity*, where creativity is defined to be "a specific work
> having some original content".
Actually, no, that's not right. There is no entitlement to "profit
from their creativity". The reason behind copyright is that since
there is *NOT* such an inherent right or entitlement, the government
takes the extra step of creating a limited monopoly power in order to
encourage wider creative works. But it has never been an entitlement.
Here's an analogy that's pretty close: the creative arts are enhanced
by grants offered by the NIH, so the government offers these grants.
Would you now say that you "are entitled to an NIH grant"????
The government offers many incentives to encourage what it sees as
good for the public. You shouldn't confuse incentives with inherent
rights.
> You charge tenants rent. You live by tenets. There are no such things as
> "tennents", although it might be a plausible old English construction
> meaning "dwelling in a tent".
Actually, Tennents is a pretty decent Scottish Ale.... :-)
--
Steve Tate --- srt[At]cs.unt.edu | Gratuitously stolen quote:
Dept. of Computer Sciences | "The box said 'Requires Windows 95, NT,
University of North Texas | or better,' so I installed Linux."
Denton, TX 76201 |
------------------------------
From: "M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A keen symmetric cipher idea
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:44:23 +0100
Tom St Denis wrote:
>
> "David Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9ck8v6$qni$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Tom St Denis wrote:
> > >I was just trying to spur discussion I wasn't trying to replace AES or
> > >something ... geez.
> >
> > "spur discussion"? To what end? If you want to learn about how to
> > design ciphers based on number theory, first you should learn about
> > number theory from the books before trying to learn from the newsgroup
> > -- that's a far more efficient use of everyone's time.
>
> First off who died and made you king of the castle?
I think you are out of line. You know enough, and have read sci.crypt
long enough to know how frustrating it is to read yet another suggested
broken cipher. Mistakes happen, but you know how useless a cipher is,
when the poster does not know the foundations upon which a cipher is
based (think: "newbie"). You've complained about one or two posters who
have posted such ciphers in the past I believe.
> Second, my book hasn't arrived yet so in the meantime should I just go into
> a coma? Sure I will go to my local library where pull out books are the
> norm and read about advanced math... sure....
Let's see, you live in Ottawa/Kanata region of Canada. Not exactly an
under-educated region of Canada. Nearby universities include: University
of Ottawa, Carleton University, and I have no idea how many public
colleges or public libraries, National Library, Research Council, CSE,
and four Chapters stores (Kanata Centrum, Rideau, Pinecrest, South
Keys). The public libraries offer free inter-library loans, including
from universities. I think you'll find the universities libraries offer
access to the public for a fee, about $20 Cdn per semester.
If you asked politely you might find people willing to freely loan or
cheaply sell you books from their private collections. In my personal
experiences, mathematics professors are incredibly willing to help
anyone interested in learning more mathematics. I'm wonder if few
readers of sci.crypt in the Ottawa region would be willing to lend or
sell you a number theory textbook.
If I was closer, I'd send you a few textbooks on number theory myself.
> Third, this is a perfect example of intelligent discussion being shuned on
> SCI as in Science, CRYPT as in cryptology. Sure the original design sucked
It isn't intelligent, in that you know you don't know number theory, yet
you propose a cipher based on theories you are not familiar with.
What is wrong with waiting 48 hours, until your book arrived? If you
can't wait, hop on a bus or in a car and visit a library.
------------------------------
From: "Tom St Denis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A keen symmetric cipher idea
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:56:37 GMT
"M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> >
> > "David Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9ck8v6$qni$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Tom St Denis wrote:
> > > >I was just trying to spur discussion I wasn't trying to replace AES
or
> > > >something ... geez.
> > >
> > > "spur discussion"? To what end? If you want to learn about how to
> > > design ciphers based on number theory, first you should learn about
> > > number theory from the books before trying to learn from the newsgroup
> > > -- that's a far more efficient use of everyone's time.
> >
> > First off who died and made you king of the castle?
>
> I think you are out of line. You know enough, and have read sci.crypt
> long enough to know how frustrating it is to read yet another suggested
> broken cipher. Mistakes happen, but you know how useless a cipher is,
> when the poster does not know the foundations upon which a cipher is
> based (think: "newbie"). You've complained about one or two posters who
> have posted such ciphers in the past I believe.
>
> > Second, my book hasn't arrived yet so in the meantime should I just go
into
> > a coma? Sure I will go to my local library where pull out books are the
> > norm and read about advanced math... sure....
>
> Let's see, you live in Ottawa/Kanata region of Canada. Not exactly an
> under-educated region of Canada. Nearby universities include: University
> of Ottawa, Carleton University, and I have no idea how many public
> colleges or public libraries, National Library, Research Council, CSE,
> and four Chapters stores (Kanata Centrum, Rideau, Pinecrest, South
> Keys). The public libraries offer free inter-library loans, including
> from universities. I think you'll find the universities libraries offer
> access to the public for a fee, about $20 Cdn per semester.
You're kidding right? Chapters doesn't house real books. You have to order
them (see below)
> If you asked politely you might find people willing to freely loan or
> cheaply sell you books from their private collections. In my personal
> experiences, mathematics professors are incredibly willing to help
> anyone interested in learning more mathematics. I'm wonder if few
> readers of sci.crypt in the Ottawa region would be willing to lend or
> sell you a number theory textbook.
>
> If I was closer, I'd send you a few textbooks on number theory myself.
That would be nice.
> > Third, this is a perfect example of intelligent discussion being shuned
on
> > SCI as in Science, CRYPT as in cryptology. Sure the original design
sucked
>
> It isn't intelligent, in that you know you don't know number theory, yet
> you propose a cipher based on theories you are not familiar with.
>
> What is wrong with waiting 48 hours, until your book arrived? If you
> can't wait, hop on a bus or in a car and visit a library.
I ordered the book on April 5th...
Tom
------------------------------
From: "M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DSA in GF(2^W)?
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:53:11 +0100
Roger Schlafly wrote:
>
> "jlcooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Though I think it would be swell to have a faster public-key algorithm
> > using long (>2000y) established theory which seems to be the only
> > advantage here... the DLP becomes easier to break as it does to make.
> > No advantages seen from my end.
>
> I'm not sure I follow. What public-key algorithm uses theory that is
> over 2000 years old? Arithmetic is that old, but that's about all.
RSA uses that factoring is hard as its basis.
Factoring has a long history, such as the Sieve of Eratosthenes (ca 240
BCE), which is over 2000 years old.
I suspect that is what the original poster meant.
------------------------------
From: "kris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Encryption and decryption in VHDL
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:04:16 +0100
Newbie poster (sorry) :-)
Does anybody have any recommendations for sites, or references
for simple encryption of serial data in VHDL ? This would be for
a serial bitstream, and would need some kind of shared key, and
there woudl need to be a method for synchronising the two data
streams.
Does anyone have any experience of this ?
Can anyone offer any advice ?
Best regards
Kris Chaplin
]
------------------------------
Subject: CryptDisk
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jacques_Th=E9riault?=)
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:18:04 GMT
Does anybody know what happens to CryptDisk for the Macintosh. I've
tried to get that program last night, but I only got dead links.
Jacques
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Censorship Threat at Information Hiding Workshop
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leonard R. Budney)
Date: 30 Apr 2001 16:20:36 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Leonard R. Budney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ...that people are entitled to profit from their *creativity*, where
>> creativity is defined to be "a specific work having some original
>> content".
>
> Actually, no, that's not right. There is no entitlement to "profit
> from their creativity". The reason behind copyright is that since
> there is *NOT* such an inherent right or entitlement, the government
> takes the extra step of creating a limited monopoly power in order to
> encourage wider creative works. But it has never been an entitlement.
That is not a priori clear. The government takes the extra step of
imposing penalties for stealing physical property, as a means of
guaranteeing a pre-existing right: the right of property. Copyright
is a much trickier issue, because it protects a right to an intangible
property. And due to its intangibility, the nature of the right itself
is subject to some philosophical debate.
In particular, copyright misused can muzzle the freedom of speech--which
is how the Stationers' Company *did* use it in the 16th century. Indeed,
the original intent of granting copyright at that time was to lock
protestants out of the publishing business. Later, it was used to block
Puritans from publishing. Today it can be used similary: copyright
lawsuits are commonly used to attack detractors, parodists, etc. That
is wrong.
The constitutional provision for copyright protects *both* the right of
authors to the fruit of their labors *and* the existence of the public
domain. But both rights transcend the statute, which seeks to balance two
basic and conflicting human rights.
If the copyright completely disappeared, by the way, then the public
domain would be the largest sufferer. Something as silly as music CDs
would continue to be produced--but especially in technical trades, the
practice would return of protecting trade secrets by old-fashioned
means. Which means that much useful information would die with its
discoverer.
(Similarly, BTW, lack of *reliable* patent protection is one of the things
holding the third world back. The chief benefit of the patent office is
that patented designs are registered where anyone can look them up. In
many third-world countries, nobody is stupid enough to deposit his
invention with the thieves running the patent offices. Which greatly
stymies progress.)
> The government offers many incentives to encourage what it sees as
> good for the public. You shouldn't confuse incentives with inherent
> rights.
That appears to be the specific sense of the Constitution: "The Congress
shall have Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,
by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
But that is not the whole reason that copyright is just and proper,
and advocates of the copyright have recognized it as partly reflecting
the entitlement to enjoy the fruit of one's labor, as far back as the
lawsuits surrounding the statute of Anne in 1710.
(Just as far back, the copyright was misused by publishers as a means of
enforcing a monopoly above and beyond the dictates of justice and decency.
Nothing new there, either.)
Len.
--
It's not helpful to hear wild guesses about the current situation or
about the difference that a change might make.
-- Dan Bernstein
------------------------------
From: "Ryan M. McConahy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Best, Strongest Algorithm
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:16:57 -0400
Since there are some major flaws with AES, such as it was designed to be
small, not necessarially to encrypt to the max, and since the NSA chose it,
what would you say is the strongest algorithm, other than an OTP?
------------------------------
From: "Ryan M. McConahy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: They seem to know something... Look
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:23:28 -0400
Look at what governmental agency isn't thinking. There are major flaws with
this VSpace encrypted chat thing. There are problems with AES. And the
implementation of AES... They need to implement public key crypto. It is
just a combersome hunkojunk. Spawning passphrases from passphrases... isn't
going to do anything. Using public keys (verified in person) will make it
much simpler and more secure. You don't want to confuse the enemy. You just
want to beat them with the math it requires.
"bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This is from the Security Portal Press Releases
> http://www.securityportal.com/pr
>
> KERVILLE, TX - The Centers for Sustainable Peace and Development picks
> VSpace, Inc. as it's choice for global information security solutions.
> VSpace, Inc., an industry leader in global information security and
> information warfare has agreed to develop and implement secure computer
> systems for the transfer, storage and dissemination of open source
> intelligence data for the Center for Sustainable Peace and Development.
The
> mission of CSPD is in the establishment of global regional centers as a
> site for peace negotiations, training in conflict resolution in addition
to
> readily offering support to humanitarian and disaster relief undertakings.
> Model systems have been developed through a research partnership with
> American University's Peace Studies Program and with the cooperation of
the
> University of Missouri.
> "For the first time ever, world-wide legislatures, organizations and
> individual activists will have tools and information to use for peacework
> equal to or better than that available to the executive branches of
> governments.", comments Director Jones. "We are pleased that VSpace, Inc.
> will play an integral role in developing the platforms vital to protecting
> the integrity of this data."
> Dr. Jeffrey Byrd, CSO and Vice President of Research and Development for
> VSpace, Inc. adds, ". while the task is a monumental undertaking, it is a
> worthy challenge to be handled with extreme precision. By providing
> specialized modifications to mission-critical systems we already have
> operation today, I believe we can deliver what they require." VSpace, Inc.
> will be implementing an intelligent database handling system that will be
> protected by a custom version of its proprietary proactive AI-driven
> security and encryption technologies.
>
> About VSpace, Inc. (Gov/Mil Code -1TRS5)
> VSpace, Inc. is a provider of global security solutions for government,
> military, and commercial applications. A recent addition to the commercial
> information security field, VSpace, Inc. was formed out of a
> merger/acquisition of Colorado-based AMA Web Solutions, LLC. and VSpace
> Communications of Michigan, forming a strong contender in the commercial
> security arena. The certified professionals at VSpace, Inc. have training
> and experience in a wide range of areas including military intelligence,
> network and internet security and supports a full staff of engineers,
> networking specialists, programmers and mathematicians. For more
> information about products and services offered, email:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
------------------------------
From: "Ryan M. McConahy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Announcing A New Rijndael Encryption Algorithm Implementation
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:20:02 -0400
"CrapMail Bait" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ryan M. McConahy" wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > Yeah. I believe you. NOT! I use PGP. I have compiled my own
> > version. No backdoors. Well,
> > as far as I know... and many people have looked over the 2.6.3
> > source code.
>
> Did you hand assemble the compiler....
>
> JLC
No. I didn't. :) If I did, I would have also built my own computer, OS,
BIOS, etc. What if our brains our bugged? What if life is a whole spoof,
like the Matrix? I don't believe it is, but then I don't find it necessary
to hand-assemble my own compiler. :)
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leonard R. Budney)
Date: 30 Apr 2001 16:35:39 -0400
"Ryan M. McConahy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since there are some major flaws with AES, such as it was designed to be
> small...
All ciphers are designed to be small. Otherwise they are not practical.
> ...not necessarially to encrypt to the max...
Other than OTP, it's not clear what "encrypt to the max" means. You
could do Rijndahl with 50,000 rounds, I suppose. But if so, you should
only write email to your unborn grandchildren.
> ...and since the NSA chose it...
You might as well leave the NSA out of your calculations. Nobody knows what
they can and can't do. The penalty for choosing under-examined ciphers is
much higher than for choosing ciphers that the NSA and hostile martians
might be able to break. (Just take my advice: don't overthrow the US or
assasinate the President. The NSA will leave you alone.)
> ...what would you say is the strongest algorithm, other than an OTP?
Strongest? Nobody really knows. Best one to use? Triple DES. But note:
it's a little slow. Fine for email and files; not as great for ssh
sessions.
Len.
--
Three cheers for frivolous OS incompatibilities!
-- Dan Bernstein
------------------------------
From: "M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:32:51 +0100
"Ryan M. McConahy" wrote:
>
> Since there are some major flaws with AES, such as it was designed to be
> small, not necessarially to encrypt to the max, and since the NSA chose it,
> what would you say is the strongest algorithm, other than an OTP?
Since no one has provided any coherent evidence of these "alleged"
flaws, I would recommend AES or TripleDES for a symmetric cipher
algorithm. Several of the other AES candidates are also worth
considering (Serpent and Twofish come to mind).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (SCOTT19U.ZIP_GUY)
Subject: Re: Best, Strongest Algorithm
Date: 30 Apr 2001 20:34:53 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ryan M. McConahy) wrote in
<3aedc92b$0$88181$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Since there are some major flaws with AES, such as it was designed to be
>small, not necessarially to encrypt to the max, and since the NSA chose
>it, what would you say is the strongest algorithm, other than an OTP?
>
>
>
I would say SCOTT19U is the strongest method out there. It treats
the whole file like a single block so any change anywhere affects
the whole encrypted file. Plus it use a specail Key that holds over
a million bytes of key space. This key is itself modifed with the
users passord.
David A. Scott
--
SCOTT19U.ZIP NOW AVAILABLE WORLD WIDE "OLD VERSIOM"
http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong/scott19u.zip
My website http://members.nbci.com/ecil/index.htm
My crypto code http://radiusnet.net/crypto/archive/scott/
MY Compression Page http://members.nbci.com/ecil/compress.htm
**NOTE FOR EMAIL drop the roman "five" ***
Disclaimer:I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be drugged or
something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you!
------------------------------
From: "Roger Schlafly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DSA in GF(2^W)?
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:38:57 GMT
"M.S. Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Roger Schlafly wrote:
> > "jlcooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Though I think it would be swell to have a faster public-key algorithm
> > > using long (>2000y) established theory which seems to be the only
> > > advantage here... the DLP becomes easier to break as it does to make.
> > > No advantages seen from my end.
> > I'm not sure I follow. What public-key algorithm uses theory that is
> > over 2000 years old? Arithmetic is that old, but that's about all.
> RSA uses that factoring is hard as its basis.
> Factoring has a long history, such as the Sieve of Eratosthenes (ca 240
> BCE), which is over 2000 years old.
> I suspect that is what the original poster meant.
The Sieve was a way of finding primes, not factoring. It does not give any
theory for how hard factoring is.
But it is a common misconception that the RSA problem is synonomous
with factoring. Breaking RSA means solving
y = x^e mod pq
for x, given y, e, and pq. Typically this means finding cube roots mod pq.
Factoring is one method, but there may be others. If the original poster
was trying to argue that the RSA problem is 2000 years older than the
discrete logarithm problem, then I disagree. It would be easier to make
the case that the discrete logarithm problem is older.
------------------------------
From: Mathew Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Announcing A New Rijndael Encryption Algorithm Implementation
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:53:33 +0100
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:20:02 -0400, "Ryan M. McConahy"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"CrapMail Bait" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Did you hand assemble the compiler....
>
>No. I didn't. :) If I did, I would have also built my own computer, OS,
>BIOS, etc. What if our brains our bugged? What if life is a whole spoof,
>like the Matrix? I don't believe it is, but then I don't find it necessary
>to hand-assemble my own compiler. :)
Just in case you haven't read/heard about it before
http://www.acm.org/classics/sep95/
The real juice starts after figure 6.
-- Mat.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
