Re: Padding Question (Cramer-Shoup 98 Crypto System)

karl_m_at_acm.org
Date: 11/23/04 

Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:00:46 -0800

David A. Scott wrote:
> Oliver Moeller <omoeller@verify-it.de> wrote in
> news:87oehrgcl7.fsf@gaia.verify-it.de:
>
> >
> > My Questions:
> > (1) Is (I) an acceptable way to pad?
> > (2) Is (II) PKCS5 better than padding with 10* ?
> > (3) Is there a suggested or even 'optimal' way to pad?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
> Yes there are much better ways to pad. You should at least
> always use some form of bijective padding weither or not your
> adding random data.

1. Reversible.
2. Unique.
3. Random.

Do you have additional attributes for bijective? karl m