On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 01:37:43PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > I don't know if that's good enough. I didn't read the exploit paper, > but wouldn't they just have to have N+1 random keys before the N evil > keys to defeat your check? It would make the attack only twice as much > data (or even much less, since the random keys could be shorter.)
Not sure. The criteria to change strategy is all in 1 if statement. (Currently the strategy change is to croak with "Awooga") > Good out-of-the-box thinking, though. Is that a compliment or an insult? :-) The idea was inspired by introspective sort, which someone mentioned on p5p a while back. Nicholas Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
