> > Symetric cryptography does a much easier thing. It combines data and some > mysterious data (key) in a way that you cannot extract data without the > mysterious data from the result. It's like a + b = c. Given c you need b to > find a. The tricks that are involved are mostly about sufficiently mixing > data, to make sure there's enough possible b's to never guess it correctly > and that all those b's have the same chance of being the one b. Preferably > even when you have both A and C, but that's really hard. > > So I'd say Bruce said that in an effort to move to more well understood > cryptography. It is also a way to move people towards simply better > algorithms, as most public key systems are very, very bad.

Funny. I would have said exactly the opposite: public key crypto is much better understood because it is based on mathematical theorems and reductions to (admittedly presumed) hard problems, whereas symmetric crypto is really a black art that mixes some simple bit wise operations and hopes for the best (yes, I know this is a bit of caricature...) Jaap-Henk _______________________________________________ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography