Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?
From: George Ou (533george_ou234_at_netzero234.com)
Date: 10/05/03
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: Is MD5 outdated ?"
- Previous message: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- In reply to: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Next in thread: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 07:24:17 GMT
On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 02:38:34 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Dennis Knorr writes:
>
>> No! otherwise you could decode AES without a password.
>
>The only difference I can see is that encryption keeps part of the
>algorithm secret (namely, the key), whereas encoding keeps all of the
>algorithm public.
>
>ZIP compression is a form of encryption, but no part of the algorithm is
>secret and the algorithm is not designed to maximize obfuscation, so it
>isn't a very useful cipher.
Even if the ZIP algorithm was secret, are you saying that it would be
useful cipher? So if the ZIP algorithm was ever known, then everyone
who used it on the entire planet would be compromised. WOW! That's a
real nice crytpo system.
I think your missing one of the most basic principles of cryptographic
security. Likelihood of a compromise rises proportionally to the
number of people who know the secret key. You NEVER use a shared key.
George Ou
http://www.LANArchitect.net
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: Is MD5 outdated ?"
- Previous message: George Ou: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- In reply to: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Next in thread: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Reply: Mxsmanic: "Re: Are natural languages secure ciphers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|