Re: Magic Flight: A New Public Key Algorithm stronger? than factoring

From: Tom St Denis (tomstdenis_at_iahu.ca)
Date: 07/07/03 

Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 15:33:11 GMT

Jim Steuert wrote:
>
> Francois Grieu wrote
>
>>
>> Magic Flight seems to gives a common shared secret only when each
>> of its "permutations" are addition of a parameter on the SAME group,
>> in which case all the permutations on one side reduce to addition
>> of a single compound parameter, which is fully revealed by the public
>> key and the public value x, making the system trivialy breakable.
>>
>
> Each layer is not simply addition or xor. That is the whole point.
> Each layer is both a very complex mixer, and also compressive.

"compressive"? You should really define your new words.

While in this context I know what you mean what you probably wanted to
say was "the co-domain has a smaller order than the domain" or "there
are collisions through the function".

> So it is not breakable. Even without any layering at all, Magic Flight
> is not breakable. It is true that the layers are indeed the same
> group (or sub-groups of them), so that the layers do commute.

That's a tall order considering Bryan [et al.] have broken every other
"attempt" you have put forward. Of course by saying "not breakable"
without any form of proof you are yet again clearly demonstrating the
complete and utter lack of professionalism on your part.

> If you have a break of the single-layer MagicFlight (let's keep this
> simple)
> then please tell me.

See this is just wrong. You are obviously not learning from the breaks
people have already made on your earlier designs. People breaking your
latest "Breakthrough invention!" will not help you, except to fuel your
pathetic self-worth and encourage you to post more random designs that
suck-ass royally.

Grow up and come back when your a bit more mature.

Tom

Quantcast