Thanks for all those who gave constructive criticism. The revised article is
available at Cornell's archive: http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.4080
Givon
_
You @ 37.com - The world's easiest free Email address !
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
...@echeque.com, cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:30:59 -0400 (EDT)
The digit sequence
0.1234567891011121314151617181920212223...
(or its equivalent in binary, hex, or your other favorite base)
never repeats, but provides
don't trust abbreviaters!)
--- bill.stew...@pobox.com wrote:
From: Bill Stewart bill.stew...@pobox.com
To: givo...@37.com
Cc: cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:44:21 -0700
At 03:56 AM 6/18/2012, Givonne Cirkin wrote:
Hi
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
___
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
: Natanael natanae...@gmail.com, cryptography@randombit.net
cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:20:13 +0200
Natanael natanae...@gmail.com wrote:
One: On the second paper, you assume a prime number as long as the message
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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I am reminded of an article my dear old friend, Martin Minow, did in
Cryptologia ages ago. He wrote the article I think for the April 1984 issue. It
might not have been 1984, but it was definitely April.
In it, he described a cryptosystem in which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jun 19, 2012, at 12:09 AM, Jon Callas wrote:
* PGP Signed: 06/19/2012 at 12:09:46 AM
I am reminded of an article my dear old friend, Martin Minow, did in
Cryptologia ages ago. He wrote the article I think for the April 1984 issue.
It
understand why is it clear to some they get it right away. why
do others not see it? i thought i was clear to use the sequence up until
the first repeat.
--- jam...@echeque.com wrote:
From: James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com
To: cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non
. but a good deterent.
--- natanae...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Natanael natanae...@gmail.com
To: givo...@37.com
Cc: cryptography@randombit.net, jam...@echeque.com
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 12:07:26 +0200
What I think people react
The digit sequence
0.1234567891011121314151617181920212223...
(or its equivalent in binary, hex, or your other favorite base)
never repeats, but provides no security whatsoever. One-time pads
need nonrepeating sequences *which the adversary can't predict*.
--
-- Jonathan Thornburg [remove
absolutely true. i mentioned (in my article) that after explaining the masking.
--- jth...@astro.indiana.edu wrote:
From: Jonathan Thornburg jth...@astro.indiana.edu
To: jam...@echeque.com, cryptography@randombit.net
Subject: Re: [cryptography] non-decryptable encryption
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012
On 2012-06-19 8:03 PM, Givonne Cirkin wrote: i don't understand why is
it clear to some they get it right away. why do others not see it? i
thought i was clear to use the sequence up until the first repeat.
This is just one time pad.
___
Natanael natanae...@gmail.com wrote:
One: On the second paper, you assume a prime number as long as the message is
secure, and give an example of a message of 500 characters. Assuming ASCII
coding and compression, that will be just a few hundred bits. RSA (using
primes too) of 1024 bits is
16 matches
Mail list logo
