Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
Am Donnerstag, 10. April 2014 schrieb travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? fundraising in it's purest form :-) -- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA. ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
The system is vulnerable to a simple chosen plaintext attack as soon as you extract a workable scheme from the vague description in the paper (see appendix A for the closest thing to an actual specification of an encryption scheme). It should be an embarrassment to both Phys Rev X and the University of Lancaster (which does have a serious cyber security research group, who surely were not consulted by the university's press office). I'll write up the attack and post it on IACR eprint. Best, Kenny On 10 Apr 2014, at 05:59, Jeffrey Goldberg jeff...@goldmark.org wrote: On 2014-04-09, at 7:17 PM, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Yep. Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? The distinction between algorithm and parameter (along with other things) seem muddled. I commented on it is a few posts in sci.crypt. Here are trimmed highlights. Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in Message-ID:bqe4cnft6k...@mid.individual.net: […]the 60 item bibliography of their paper cites only one source in cryptography (and that is on quantum key exchange). Somehow the first sentence of the paper doesn't inspire confidence either: It is often the case that great scientific and technological discoveries are … […] What I see as I glance over this paper is that people who have been caught up in the fadish understanding of chaos theory see that they get PRNGs out of their dynamical systems (true enough). But quite emphatically, the PRNGs that you get from most of this non-linear dynamical systems are not cryptographically appropriate. Indeed, there are tests that can distinguish whether the random sequences is likely to be from such a system. If I understand correctly, even their noise filtering component depends on exactly that technology. Cheers, -j ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
On 10 April 2014 01:17, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? Also not novel. I don't have a reference to hand, but I was already aware of the idea of using coupling functions between dynamical systems for crypto. ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
i did not read the paper, but, if their model is a variant of OTP, with a running stream cipher, it is possible, that it is non-decryptable by method or semantically secure, or has no algorithmic decryption, only brute force. however, as protein signalling (bio-informatics) is based on a limited alphabet of amino acids, which is further reduced because form requires that each amino acid will have only one mate (opposite)--the shape structure of proteins very much defines the function of proteins; i am hard pressed to see, how they can come up with an infinite number of possibilities. rather, the signaling would be quite specific. in other words, well defined, not ambiguous. just the opposite of OTP. On 4/10/2014 12:53 AM, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: On 2014-04-09, at 7:17 PM, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Yep. Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? The distinction between algorithm and parameter (along with other things) seem muddled. I commented on it is a few posts in sci.crypt. Here are trimmed highlights. Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in Message-ID: bqe4cnft6k...@mid.individual.net: [...]the 60 item bibliography of their paper cites only one source in cryptography (and that is on quantum key exchange). Somehow the first sentence of the paper doesn't inspire confidence either: It is often the case that great scientific and technological discoveries are ... [...] What I see as I glance over this paper is that people who have been caught up in the fadish understanding of chaos theory see that they get PRNGs out of their dynamical systems (true enough). But quite emphatically, the PRNGs that you get from most of this non-linear dynamical systems are not cryptographically appropriate. Indeed, there are tests that can distinguish whether the random sequences is likely to be from such a system. If I understand correctly, even their noise filtering component depends on exactly that technology. Cheers, -j ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
[cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? -- http://www.subspacefield.org/~travis/ Remediating... like a BOSS. pgpN5LxP8p9JX.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
On 4/9/2014 8:17 PM, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography This could lead to a heart attack. Okay, now we're just getting silly! -- Kevin ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
On 2014-04-09, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: This is nonsense, right? At least it reads as Sokal v2.0. Though in this case both Physical Review and the University of Lancaster would for once seem to be in on the joke. Be as it may, there's no chance I'd throw the day or two it'd require into actually debugging that stuff. Rather clearly the authors can write Queen's proper, so once they chose not to do so, they made it damn sure even any extant idea of theirs wasn't supposed to be understood. Thus, fuck that shit; you're supposed to know better as part of the etiquette of (the) science (of security) in any case. Not to mention the fact that at most they just reinvented the idea of a symmetric cipher in a nonstandard and difficult to implement/understand/analyze form, or in the utmost, nary something not better handled by plain-'ol Diffie-Hellman. Who cares? -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front +358-40-3255353, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2 ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [cryptography] crypto mdoel based on cardiorespiratory coupling
On 2014-04-09, at 7:17 PM, travis+ml-rbcryptogra...@subspacefield.org wrote: http://threatpost.com/crypto-model-based-on-human-cardiorespiratory-coupling/105284 This is nonsense, right? Yep. Unbounded in the sense of relying on secrecy of the unbounded number of algorithms? The distinction between algorithm and parameter (along with other things) seem muddled. I commented on it is a few posts in sci.crypt. Here are trimmed highlights. Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in Message-ID: bqe4cnft6k...@mid.individual.net: […]the 60 item bibliography of their paper cites only one source in cryptography (and that is on quantum key exchange). Somehow the first sentence of the paper doesn't inspire confidence either: It is often the case that great scientific and technological discoveries are … […] What I see as I glance over this paper is that people who have been caught up in the fadish understanding of chaos theory see that they get PRNGs out of their dynamical systems (true enough). But quite emphatically, the PRNGs that you get from most of this non-linear dynamical systems are not cryptographically appropriate. Indeed, there are tests that can distinguish whether the random sequences is likely to be from such a system. If I understand correctly, even their noise filtering component depends on exactly that technology. Cheers, -j signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
