Re: webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
James Muir wrote: > Also, I vaguely recall another news story (1999?) that > reported on an encryption technique that hypothesized a stream of random > bits generated by an orbiting satellite. Likely Rabin's hyperencryption. I posted about it here a few years back: http://diswww.mit.edu/bloom-picayune/crypto/15423 There is still active work being done on a "virtual satellite" implementation. -- Ivan Krstic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GPG: 0x147C722D - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
| I think the "Rip Van Winkle cipher" was mentioned in Schneier's Applied | Cryptography. Also, I vaguely recall another news story (1999?) that | reported on an encryption technique that hypothesized a stream of random | bits generated by an orbiting satellite. Probably Rabin's work on beacons. It explored the results of assuming a universally available oracle providing the same stream of random bits to everyone. (If you think of the randomized Turing machine model as a TM plus an oracle giving that machine a random bit stream, you can think of this as a bunch of communicating TM's that get *the same* random bit stream.) -- Jerry - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
Heyman, Michael wrote: Internet webcam signals from webcams could emerge as an exotic but effective new tool for securing terrestrial communications against eavesdropping. > > Kidding aside, there are some interesting theoretical results about ciphers that utilize a plentiful, publicly available source of random bits. See: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/context/238746/0 I think the "Rip Van Winkle cipher" was mentioned in Schneier's Applied Cryptography. Also, I vaguely recall another news story (1999?) that reported on an encryption technique that hypothesized a stream of random bits generated by an orbiting satellite. "Quasar encryption" is likely impractical, but there could be more to it than you think. However, I did think "web cam encryption" was funny. :-) -James -- James Muir, [EMAIL PROTECTED] School of Computer Science, Carleton University http://www.ccsl.carleton.ca/~jamuir - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
Internet webcam signals from webcams could emerge as an exotic but effective new tool for securing terrestrial communications against eavesdropping. Scientists have come up with a method for encrypting messages using the internet objects, which emit signals and are thought to be powered by DC voltage. Scientists at the National Institute of Cool Security Ideas (NICSI) propose using the signals emitted by webcams to lock and unlock digital communications in a secure fashion. The researchers believe webcams could make an ideal cryptographic tool because the signals they emit are impossible to predict. "Webcam-based cryptography is based on a physical fact that such a webcam signal is random and has a very broad frequency spectrum." NICSI scientists suggest using an agreed webcam signal to add randomness to a stream cipher. Each communicating party would only need to know which webcam to monitor and when to start in order to encrypt and decrypt a message. Without knowing the target webcam and time an eavesdropper should be unable to decrypt the message. NICSI scientists believes voyeur-cryptography could appeal to anyone who requires high-security communications. He adds that the method does not require a large radio antenna like quasar encryption because the signals exist already on the internet. Plus quasar signals are really boring compared to many webcam signals. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]