In Practical Cryptography, Schneier states that the you can prove
that when n is not a prime, a certain property of a mod n holds for at
most 25% of possible values 1 a n. He later states that Fermat's
test can be fooled by Carmichael numbers, and finally he basically
says that Miller-Rabin is
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Travis H. wrote:
PS: There's a paper on cryptanalyzing CFS on my homepage below. I
got to successfully use classical cryptanalysis on a relatively modern
system! That is a rare joy. CFS really needs a re-write, there's no
real good alternatives for cross-platform
Nice, but linux-only and requires special kernel support. cfs supports
lots and lots of different OSs and doesn't require kernel modes. So far
as I know, in this regard cfs is unique among cryptographic filesystems.
The only thing close that I've seen is Bestcrypt, which is commercial
and
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Jason Holt wrote:
Take a look at ecryptfs before rewriting cfs
... or at TrueCrypt (which works on linux and windows):
http://www.truecrypt.org/downloads.php
--
Regards,
ASK
-
The Cryptography Mailing
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 05:58:04AM -0600, Travis H. wrote:
The only thing close that I've seen is Bestcrypt, which is commercial
and has a Linux and Windows port. I don't recall if the Linux port
came with source or not.
http://www.truecrypt.org/
TrueCrypt
Free open-source disk encryption
It appears that Fermat's test can be fooled by Carmichael numbers,
whereas Miller-Rabin is immune, but I'm not sure why.
Where does it say Miller-Rabin is immune to Carmichael numbers? It
seems confusingly worded and says that Fermat's Test is not immune to
Carmichaels, but this does not imply
