Re: attack against ElGamal (and related algorithms)
From: John E. Hadstate (jh113355_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 12/22/03
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: NEW BIJECTIVE LZW COMPRESSOR"
- Previous message: Sebastian Gesemann: "Re: Encrypted IM program"
- In reply to: Bryan Olson: "Re: attack against ElGamal (and related algorithms)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:22:18 -0500
"Bryan Olson" <bryanjugglercryptographer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a517b5.0312211423.5d99ada4@posting.google.com...
>
> I'm pretty sure Schneier is wrong about the "or encrypted" part.
>
> I think I can see how this happened: Schneier doesn't describe
> ElGamal encryption until the next page, so use of k in
> encryption is not yet defined when he makes the remark about
> recovering x (the private key).
My analysis shows that Eve can't recover the private key, X, (without
solving the DLP) but if K is constant and known, she can decrypt the message
just as if she knew X. So, while technically she didn't recover the private
key, practically she doesn't need to.
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: NEW BIJECTIVE LZW COMPRESSOR"
- Previous message: Sebastian Gesemann: "Re: Encrypted IM program"
- In reply to: Bryan Olson: "Re: attack against ElGamal (and related algorithms)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|