Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, John Gilmore
had to walk into mine and say:
> Niels & Peter, congratulations on finding no secret messages. This is
> why computers are getting faster -- so we can spend more and more time
> searching out the lack of any information being communicated.
Faster computers favour the encoder, not the attacker. In this case, a
faster computer means I can spend more time making the steganography
match the statistical properties of the original image.
> PS: Cypherpunks, where *are* you putting your secret messages? Give
> us a hint! Surely *somebody* in this crew must be leaving some
> bread-crumbs around for Niels and NSA to find... :-)
How many images are posted to usenet every *day*, never mind the sheer
number of images stored on webservers everywhere. IANAS, but a mere one
million messages is too small a sample set to be statistically
significant.
A (paraphrased) quote from a recent TV show:
"If that doesn't work, I'll hide it in an MPEG and post it on
AudioGalaxy".
--
Harald Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It takes a child to raze a village."
-Michael Fry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
