Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:31:09AM +0500,
> Tariq Saraj <[email protected]> wrote
> a message of 80 lines which said:
>
> > Unfortunately plaintext is known,
>
> As I said, it is not. You can sometimes *guess* some of the questions
> and answers (it is safe to assume that the user's machine will query
> google-analytics.com at least from time to time), it does not give you
> the full plaintext (query ID, for instance). And, as Shane explained
> (you should have read it), modern crypto is not vulnerable to
> "known-plaintext attacks".
Not just modern crypto, apparently (if you believe Wikipedia), there was
at least one electro-mechanical encryption machine that was "considered
secure against known plaintext attack", at least by its vendor:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KL-7
In 1952, the machine was introduced by AFSA's successor, the U.S.
National Security Agency, in the US Army, Navy and Air Force. In the
early 1960s, the AFSAM-7 was renamed TSEC/KL-7, following the new
standard crypto nomenclature. It was the most widely used crypto
machine in the US armed forces until the mid-1960s and was the first
machine capable of supporting large networks that was considered
secure against known plaintext attack. The KL-7 was also used by
several NATO countries until 1983.
--
Robert Edmonds
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
