Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again
From: Mxsmanic (mxsmanic_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/17/03
- Next message: Dan Wolf: "Cisco MD5 Algorithm"
- Previous message: Steve: "Australian Crypto Laws"
- In reply to: Benjamin Choi: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Next in thread: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Reply: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Reply: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 05:33:03 +0200
Benjamin Choi writes:
> But looking at Meganet's clever Terms And Conditions,
> one sees that the contest winner can only win if he
> - Breaks VME
> - Provides an explanation which satisfies Meganet (who knows what
> will or will not satisfy them?)
It is only necessary to break the algorithm. That would be enough to
convince potential customers of its insecurity, whether Meganet accepts
the evidence or not.
> The difficulty in breaking VME is because VME is closed source and
> because it's such a complicated algorithm that no one is going to
> bother to cryptanalyse it.
So it's a security algorithm after all? If nobody can be bothered to
break it, then it is effectively secure, no matter what it's theoretical
weaknesses.
If it is really as bad as people say, it should be trivial to break. If
nobody is trying to break it, then messages encrypted with it are indeed
secure.
-- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
- Next message: Dan Wolf: "Cisco MD5 Algorithm"
- Previous message: Steve: "Australian Crypto Laws"
- In reply to: Benjamin Choi: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Next in thread: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Reply: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Reply: Mike Curry: "Re: Meganet on Cryptogram again"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
