Re: [cryptography] Intel RNG

2012-06-20 Thread Joachim Strömbergson
Aloha! On 2012-06-20 05:32 , James A. Donald wrote: If intel told me how it worked, and provided low level access to raw unwhitened output, I could find pretty good evidence that the low level randomness generator was working as described, and perfect evidence that the whitener was working as

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread James Muir
On 12-06-19 08:51 PM, Jonathan Katz wrote: Anyone know any technical details about this? From the news reports I've seen, it's not even clear to me what, exactly, was broken.

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Charles Morris
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:07 AM, James Muir muir.jame...@gmail.com wrote: On 12-06-19 08:51 PM, Jonathan Katz wrote: Anyone know any technical details about this? From the news reports I've seen, it's not even clear to me what, exactly, was broken.

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Matthew Green
I'm definitely /not/ an ECC expert, but this is a pairing-friendly curve, which means it's vulnerable to a type of attack where EC group elements can be mapped into a field (using a bilinear map), then attacked using an efficient field-based solver. (Coppersmith's). NIST curves don't have this

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Charles Morris
NIST curves don't have this property. In fact, they're specifically chosen so that there's no efficiently-computable pairing. Ah, of course. I wasn't thinking. ___ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Matthew Green
I've been told (by somebody much more diligent than I, who actually did the math) that the number of compute-cycles works out to around 2^64. The theoretical number of steps required is 2^53. Of course, each step is /not/ 1 cycle, so if we assume that they're around 2048 cycles each it's right

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin
yes. just with a specific choice of key. --- jam...@echeque.com wrote: From: James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com To: givo...@37.com CC: cryptography@randombit.net Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:48:01 +1000 On 2012-06-19 8:03 PM, Givonne Cirkin

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin
yes. and i covered this. esp. when the issue applies to the stenagraphic component. using phi as a model of the method. but, phi is well known predictable. however, other sequences not. --- jth...@astro.indiana.edu wrote: From: Jonathan Thornburg jth...@astro.indiana.edu To:

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Givonne Cirkin
curious, why don't some ppl trust link shortners? is that a generation gap thing. 2nd. ur guesses are wrong. i was born in the USA. my parents were born in the USA. my native language is English. my parent's native language is English. i grew up speaking English @ home. i went to

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Florian Weingarten
On 06/20/2012 06:54 PM, Givonne Cirkin wrote: curious, why don't some ppl trust link shortners? is that a generation gap thing. Because there are serious privacy issues with most of them. http://w2spconf.com/2011/papers/urlShortening.pdf ___

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread The Fungi
On 2012-06-20 09:54:33 -0700 (-0700), Givonne Cirkin wrote: curious, why don't some ppl trust link shortners? is that a generation gap thing. 2nd. ur guesses are wrong. i was born in the USA. my parents were born in the USA. my native language is English. [...] Perhaps this is also a

[cryptography] Why do scammers say they're from Nigeria?

2012-06-20 Thread Tim Dierks
This is an interesting paper that presumably has implications for other social engineering schemes beside financial scammers: http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/167719/WhyFromNigeria.pdf ABSTRACT False positives cause many promising detection technologies to be unworkable in practice. Attackers,

Re: [cryptography] Why do scammers say they're from Nigeria?

2012-06-20 Thread Kyle Creyts
Emphasis on _most profitable_ here. Clearly not the only one employed. Also, this mode applies mostly to spam; there are a number of other ways of filtering the victims who will take interest, be more gullible, or get hooked that do not require being obviously dubious. On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Natanael
Not 10^500. That's assuming all numbers are primes. With larger numbers, the ratio of prime numbers to ordinary drops. A lot. I don't think it's more than 1^50 primes there, could be far less. Also, you are SERIOUSLY underestimating cryptoanalysis. You assume to much about how well these tricks

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Samuel Neves
On 20-06-2012 22:12, Jon Callas wrote: Is this merely a case where 973 bits is equivalent to ~60 bits symmetric? If so, what's equivalent to AES-128 and 256? Is there something inherently weak in pairing-friendly curves, like there are in p^n curves? Disclaimer: I'm not an authority either,

Re: [cryptography] cryptanalysis of 923-bit ECC?

2012-06-20 Thread Matthew Green
For a proper answer, You should follow pbarreto on Twitter and ask him. He's a nice guy and *very* willing to talk about this. Mostly because he found the press release so misleading. But in any case, the answer to your question is: this is not a standard choice for a pairing friendly curve.

[cryptography] Sure ...

2012-06-20 Thread Randall Webmail
Flame's too big to take on alone, says Microsoft by Alastair Stevenson More from this author 21 Jun 2012 Seattle: Cyber threats like Flame are too big and too advanced for even the most security savvy of companies to take on alone, according to Microsoft Trustworthy Computing senior

Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption

2012-06-20 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Givonne Cirkin givo...@37.com wrote: curious, why don't some ppl trust link shortners?  is that a generation gap thing. Someone recently played a trick on Full Disclosure. Something about advanced notice of an Apple Update. It was a bitty link to a eVote