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 ]
Relevant Pages
|