On 9/9/06, Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IGE if this description summarized by Travis is correct, appears to be
> a re-invention of Anton Stiglic and my proposed FREE-MAC mode.
> However the FREE-MAC mode (below described as IGE) was broken back in
> Mar 2000 or maybe earlier by Gligor,
Travis H. wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> IGE if this description summarized by Travis is correct, appears to be
>> a re-invention of Anton Stiglic and my proposed FREE-MAC mode.
>> However the FREE-MAC mode (below described as IGE) was broken back in
>> Mar 2000 or mayb
On 9/9/06, Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IGE if this description summarized by Travis is correct, appears to be
a re-invention of Anton Stiglic and my proposed FREE-MAC mode.
However the FREE-MAC mode (below described as IGE) was broken back in
Mar 2000 or maybe earlier by Gligor, Donescu
--
James A. Donald
> > > We transmit T(k)= {W(k)} + W(k-1)|{W(k-1)} where |
> > > means bitwise or, curly brace means encryption.
> > Should read: We transmit T(k) = {W(k)} +
> > ((~W(k-11){W(k-1)}) where ~ means bitwise negation,
> > | means bitwise or, curly brace means encryption.
Travis
On 9/10/06, James A. Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Typo:
> We transmit T(k)= {W(k)} + W(k-1)|{W(k-1)} where |
> means bitwise or, curly brace means encryption.
Should read:
We transmit T(k) = {W(k)} + ((~W(k-11){W(k-1)})
where ~ means bitwise negation, | means bitwise or,
curly brace means en
Kuehn, Ulrich wrote:
>
>
>> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Do I understand correctly? You do want that nobody is able to
>>> authenticate a message, however, it shall not be intelligible if
>>> manipulated with?
>> Correct. Minx (which is the only place I use IGE) avoids
>> t
> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Do I understand correctly? You do want that nobody is able to
> > authenticate a message, however, it shall not be intelligible if
> > manipulated with?
>
> Correct. Minx (which is the only place I use IGE) avoids
> traffic marking attacks in
Kuehn, Ulrich wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message- From: Ben Laurie
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Samstag, 9. September 2006 22:39
>> To: Adam Back Cc: Travis H.; Cryptography; Anton Stiglic Subject:
>> Re: IGE mode is broken (Re: IGE mode in OpenSSL)
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Samstag, 9. September 2006 22:39
> To: Adam Back
> Cc: Travis H.; Cryptography; Anton Stiglic
> Subject: Re: IGE mode is broken (Re: IGE mode in OpenSSL)
>
[...]
>
> In any case, I
Typo:
James A. Donald wrote:
Let P(k) be the kth block of plain text. We prepend a
random block, P(0) to the text, and append a fixed block
to the end. If anything is altered, the fixed block at
the end will not contain the expected data, but will be
gibberish.
The adversary knows every block
--
Adam Back wrote:
> Hi Ben, Travis
>
> IGE if this description summarized by Travis is
> correct, appears to be a re-invention of Anton Stiglic
> and my proposed FREE-MAC mode. However the FREE-MAC
> mode (below described as IGE) was broken back in Mar
> 2000 or maybe earlier by Gligor, Done
Adam Back wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 09:39:04PM +0100, Ben Laurie wrote:
>>> There is some more detail here:
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.crypt/browse_thread/thread/e1b9339bf9fb5060/62ced37bb9713a39?lnk=st
>> Interesting. In fact, Gligor et al appear to have proposed IGE rather
>
On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 09:39:04PM +0100, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > There is some more detail here:
> >
> > http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.crypt/browse_thread/thread/e1b9339bf9fb5060/62ced37bb9713a39?lnk=st
>
> Interesting. In fact, Gligor et al appear to have proposed IGE rather
> later than this
Adam Back wrote:
> Hi Ben, Travis
>
> IGE if this description summarized by Travis is correct, appears to be
> a re-invention of Anton Stiglic and my proposed FREE-MAC mode.
> However the FREE-MAC mode (below described as IGE) was broken back in
> Mar 2000 or maybe earlier by Gligor, Donescu and I
14 matches
Mail list logo
