Re: That was my point exactly
From: Gustavo L. Fabro (gustavo_fabro%removethis%_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 10/07/04
- Previous message: mike: "Re: Any truth to rumor that NSA had Public Key Crypto first?"
- In reply to: Paul Tomkins: "That was my point exactly"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 18:45:30 -0700
Hi Paul,
> A OTP-type cipher **must** use a random key in order to be secure. There
> was a lot of talk of cats and dogs in posts so, even though a number of
> people pointed this out in their posts, I was concerned that Gustavo may
> have held and continued to hold the opinion that any key was acceptable
> even if it was non-random.
Not really! As stated by me on another post after the original:
>Too bad this isn't really practical, but, yes, could be used on
>some cases; e.g. a double sided DVD with 9.4GB of random data could
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Maybe only forgot to emphasize on the *true* randomness of the key
and not reusing it... But that was implicit (at least for me). But I got
the picture! ;-) Thanx!
And just to reassure what was previously said by Bill and Giorgio, there are
real random number hardware generators, sci.crypt.random-numbers being
a good place to seek for that kind of info.
- Previous message: mike: "Re: Any truth to rumor that NSA had Public Key Crypto first?"
- In reply to: Paul Tomkins: "That was my point exactly"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
