Re: one time pads
From: Chris Mattern (syscjm_at_gwu.edu)
Date: 08/27/03
- Next message: kspecial_at_linuxmail.org: "Windows shellcode on AMD Athlon."
- Previous message: Chris Mattern: "Re: sneaky snooper window"
- In reply to: PCportinc: "one time pads"
- Next in thread: jim evans: "Re: one time pads"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:17:55 -0400
PCportinc wrote:
> I watched that PBS special on the Atom Bomb spies.
> They talked about one time pads used by the Soviets
> and said that even today's super computers cannot
> break the pad. is this true?
Yes, it is.
> if so, then even such simple
> methods as were used 50 years ago could still be used
> today and not even the NSA or the FBI would be able
> to figure out what the encrypted message is?
Yes, provided you can properly set up a OTP system.
>
> if so, why the need for RSA, Blowfish, 128-bit, PGP, TEA, etc.?
Because, by its nature, one time pads require the secure
transmission of the pads--which have to be the same size
as the message to encrypted. For most computer applications,
the requirements of one-time-pads make them unusable, because
secure transmission of the pads is impractical (encrypting
the pads to secure them is pointless--it would be just as
secure to simply encrypt the message with the encryption
method you were going to use for the pads).
> The bad old Ruskies didnt use them, neither did the Germans in
> WWII, and if it wasnt for human error, their encrypted messages
> would not have been decoded.
>
Chris Mattern
- Next message: kspecial_at_linuxmail.org: "Windows shellcode on AMD Athlon."
- Previous message: Chris Mattern: "Re: sneaky snooper window"
- In reply to: PCportinc: "one time pads"
- Next in thread: jim evans: "Re: one time pads"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]