# Re: RIP proof secret splitting

**From:** Roger Schlafly (*rogersc@mindspring.com*)

**Date:** 04/24/03

**Next message:**Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Previous message:**Vedat Hallac: "Re: A question about modular exponentiation"**Next in thread:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**John E. Hadstate: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

From: "Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 22:06:36 GMT

<thisisme-no-spam@cotse.net> wrote

*> decrypt the message without both halves. A problem would
*

*> arise, however, if the plaintext is easy to guess, because
*

*> then the owner of one of the shadows could simply guess
*

*> at possible plaintexts until he got it right. To avoid this ...
*

If the encryption method is resistant to chosen-ciphertext

attacks, then guessing does not work. Maybe that's what

you want.

**Next message:**Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Previous message:**Vedat Hallac: "Re: A question about modular exponentiation"**Next in thread:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**John E. Hadstate: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Maybe reply:**Roger Schlafly: "Re: RIP proof secret splitting"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]