X-Loop: openpgp.net From: David Honig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Er.. do you mean that if I encrypt a 64-bit counter equal to zero, and then > >I increment it (and re-encrypt), I should get two very different values? > > Think about it. If you *didn't*, then there would be a > useful distance metric, where an output is related to its > input in a way you could see without the secret key. I know that hashes have this property - one flipped bit in the input changes a lot in the output - but I thought ciphers don't have this requirement. > You're playing with a poor cipher if its not true. > If you're implementing a good cipher, you're not doing > it right, you've implemented a different algorithm. See > my last comment. I'm using someone else's implementation. Looks like I'll have to roll out my own... [I hope to stop here, though. I have no interest of rewriting Windows. <g>] > You rely on the original author for reference code and > test vectors. Ok. I guess it's time to download the counterpane specifications again :) Thanks, Mark
