Re: Flirting with cryptography problem
From: Gregory G Rose (ggr_at_qualcomm.com)
Date: 07/31/03
- Next message: Gregory G Rose: "Re: Into the Fire"
- Previous message: nemo outis: "Re: Repost: Cryptoparanoid? Take the test"
- In reply to: Paul Rubin: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Next in thread: Michael Amling: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Reply: Michael Amling: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 30 Jul 2003 18:24:42 -0700
In article <7xsmonwq9c.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
>Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com> writes:
>> He remarked on a classic physical solution: provide Alice and Bob with
>> two identical looking weights, one of which is heavy and one light. If
>> they fancy the other person they place the heavy weight onto a scale,
>> otherwise they place the light version. On the other side of the scale
>> is 2 x the heavy weight.
>>
>> Hence if they both fancy each other then the scale will balance, but if
>> at least one placed the light weight then the scale will not move.
>
>I don't think that's a complete solution: if Alice is interested in
>Bob but not vice versa, Alice uses a heavy weight and Bob uses a light
>one, and the scale doesn't move. Alice will thus learn that Bob isn't
>interested in her, which he presumably didn't want to reveal, any more
>than he'd want to reveal his interest if he'd had one.
But that's inevitable in the binary case. If She's
willing and They are not, it must have been
because He wasn't. Note that it doesn't leak information
to observers, though.
"If I had some ham, I'd have some ham and eggs, if
I had some eggs." -- Frank Herbert (I think).
-- Greg Rose INTERNET: ggr@qualcomm.com Qualcomm Australia VOICE: +61-2-9817 4188 FAX: +61-2-9817 5199 Level 3, 230 Victoria Road, http://people.qualcomm.com/ggr/ Gladesville NSW 2111 232B EC8F 44C6 C853 D68F E107 E6BF CD2F 1081 A37C
- Next message: Gregory G Rose: "Re: Into the Fire"
- Previous message: nemo outis: "Re: Repost: Cryptoparanoid? Take the test"
- In reply to: Paul Rubin: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Next in thread: Michael Amling: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Reply: Michael Amling: "Re: Flirting with cryptography problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|