Re: Dynamic "One-time-pad"

From: Simon Johnson (simon.johnson_at_gmail.com)
Date: 11/29/04 

Date: 29 Nov 2004 12:11:46 -0800

eschnoor@multi-matrix.de (Erich Schnoor) wrote in message news:<fe1cbf71.0411290352.b0a72ab@posting.google.com>...
> Hallo, dear internet partners,
>
> Bruce Schneier stated:
> "http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_doghouse_va_1.html"
>
> >> Quotation "Statement: Vadium Technology"
>
> > I am continually amazed at the never-ending stream of one-time pad
> > systems. Every few months another company believes that they have finally
> > figured out how to make a commercial one-time pad system. They announce
> > it, are uniformly laughed at, and then disappear. It's cryptography's
> > perpetual motion machine.
>
> But, no offence intended, I aggree with his opinion but I don't laugh about
> those people who did their best efforts to find a solution in this complex
> matter. It seems to be the problem of the subject that there is obviously no
> solution possible, even not by "brute force". But times go on.
> Notwithstanding I deal with the problem since more than fife years.
>
> Against the "perpetual motion machine" I want to put up for discussion
> a "single motion machine". It works as follows:
>
> 1. From a quantity of 256 different digital characters a byte generator
> ("CypherMatrix", name by the author) creates in plaintext intervals
> of 63 bytes:
>
> a) permutated series of bytes (8-bit each) serial stored in a
> key file and
> b) same number of cipher alphabets (array of 128 characters each
> with index values of 7-bit sequences: 0 - 127).
>
> 2. Plaintext blocks of 63 bytes XOR-concatenated with block keys of
> 63 bytes derivated from the key file. Keys and plaintext sequences
> have always the same length. This may be denominated as partial or
> dynamic "one-time-pad".
> (regarding to Bruce: I already hear him laughing)
>
> 3. Results of the XOR-concatenation (63 x 8-bit sequences) are devided
> into 72 x 7-bit sequences ("bit conversion").
>
> 4. Each 7-bit sequence constitutes an index value (0 to 127) to address
> (pointer) a single character in the cipher array. The found characters
> form the cipher text to be sent to the addressee.

Sorry Erich, but this is pretty unreadable. Please produce a formal
description your algorithm. A good standard to set yourself is the
ability to give your paper to a programmer who knows nothing of
cryptography and for them to be able to reproduce your algorithm from
the specification alone.

If they can't do this unambigiously then your paper isn't good enough
to be posted here.

> http://www.telecypher.net/CORECYPH.HTM
> http://www.telecypher.net/CYPHERLN.HTM

Neither of these links are any more intelligible that this brief
account.

> The additional steps in 3) and 4) are necessary because there is no real
> protection with the simple XOR-concatenation [Bruce Schneier], even not in
> a dynamic "one-time-pad".

> A cryptographic mechanism based on the above steps
> - for example: "CypherMatrix" method - will be resistant against all
> conventional attacks, even against brute force.

Finally, you should conclude your paper with a formal proof of this
statement.

Remember, we already have designs that do the job well enough and we
have good reasons to suspect they'll be secure for their design life
time. When presenting this new cipher you have to put a convincing
case together as to *why* this new construction is better than the
rest? Why should I use your construction over AES, for example?

Be aware that while you have the freedom to post to this newsgroup all
you like you have no right to be heard. Not being heard hurts because
security comes through scrutiny and not through obsecurity. If nobody
here breaks your scheme that doesn't mean it's secure any more than
the fact that no-one has smashed down my front-door in the thirteen
years i've lived at my address means that my door is impenetrable.

If you really believe in the security of your design you'd do well to
follow my advise and produce a readable paper then enter the
construction in to the sci.crypt sandbox.

   http://sandbox.emboss.co.nz/index.php

Simon.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SPES (my new encryption) one of its kind
    ... I'm talking to someone who proposes a new cipher around here: Your design ... cryptanalysis also can reduce this huge number considerably making this ... unit mandatory (to be explained during explaining my encryption system) ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: 3vl 2vl and NULL
    ... a 5 floor building, the air-con guys were ducting the 3rd floor when ... part of the structural design to allow construction of another 5 floors ... overall design and consulting widely. ... integrity. ...
    (comp.databases.theory)
  • Re: NC: I-40 widening in Asheville to begin in next few weeks
    ... >lanes should begin in the next few weeks, the contractor said Thursday. ... >Asheville-based Taylor & Murphy Construction Co. won the $42.9 million ... >design the project then pass the plans onto a contractor, ... >Rick Lutovsky, president of the Asheville Area Chamber of Commerce, ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Stream Cipher Like SEAL Wanted ....
    ... Though in crypto circles thats weak because just because your design ... > Did I say a PRNG was a cipher? ... RC4 is a cipher. ... PRNG tests and its a HORRIBLE cipher. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: SPES (my new encryption) one of its kind
    ... I'm talking to someone who proposes a new cipher around here: Your design ... but that the attacker will payit over and over. ... every encryption system has advantages and dis-advantages,and every ...
    (sci.crypt)