On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 10:45:48 +1000 (EST) Dave Horsfall
d...@horsfall.org wrote:
Funny you should mention that. Back in the late 70s, a work
colleague suggested that the Unix crypt() function was a ring (we
both had mathematical backgrounds), which gave me the idea of
repeatedly encrypting the
On 01/09/2010 22:45, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Ben Laurie b...@links.org wrote:
Or, to put it another way, in order to show that a Merkle signature is
at least as good as any other, then you'll first have to show that an
iterated hash is at least as secure as a
On 09/03/2010 03:45 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:
That's the whole point - a hash function used on an arbitrary message
produces one of its possible outputs. Feed that hash back in and it
produces one of a subset of its possible outputs. Each time you do this,
you lose a little entropy (I can't
Folks:
Regarding earlier discussion on these lists about the difficulty of
factoring and post-quantum cryptography and so on, you might be
interested in this note that I just posted to the tahoe-dev list:
100-year digital signatures
