On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Brian Mearns<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:02 PM, gerry_lowry (alliston ontario canada > (705) 250-0112)<[email protected]> > wrote: >> Robert wrote in part that "We've known since '99 that Solitaire is weak, >> thanks to the work of Paul Crowley". >> >> It was, however, sufficient as a plot device in "Cryptonomicon". >> >> Even simple systems like pig-latin are sufficient as long as they are more >> sophisticated than those >> from whom one wishes to safeguard information. >> > > Thanks, Gerry. I'm familiar with the system and the book (which was > excellent). But Bruce Schneier still claims on this site that the > cipher is reasonable strong, and now that I've heard otherwise I'm > seeking more information. > > -Brian >
Replying to myself, I found Crowley's site detailing the bias in solitaire: http://www.ciphergoth.org/crypto/solitaire/ I only really have a basic understanding of crypto, nothing deeply mathematical enough to understand how this actually effects the strength of the cipher. Would anyone care to explain this at all? Thanks, -Brian -- Feel free to contact me using PGP Encryption: Key Id: 0x3AA70848 Available from: http://keys.gnupg.net _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
