Re: advice sought on key/data histogram analysis of rijndael/128 and serpent

From: lkcl (lkcl_at_lkcl.net)
Date: 10/23/05

  • Next message: lkcl: "Re: advice sought on key/data histogram analysis of rijndael/128 and serpent"
    Date: 23 Oct 2005 09:16:08 -0700
    
    

    > That the
    > statistical code written by me reflects that as the number of blocks
    > increases any such correlation disappears

    hiya joe,

    then, to me, that would indicate that the use of additional
    blocks is not a suitable test for looking for problems :)

    i'm comfortable with increasing the _number_ of tests
    rather than increasing the block size as a means to
    increase detection of unexpected correlations.

    i'm presently working on some variations on the theme,
    to endeavour to show correlations between bits set in
    the input data and bits set in the output data.

    i took inspiration from your idea of measuring all counts
    rather than just p-values < 0.01 - i now have TWENTY
    sets of histograms, representing the range of p-values
    0 <= pv <= 0.01, 0.01 < pv < 0.04 etc.

    the news isn't good, i'm afraid: there are definite
    and bluntly obvious correlations evident in the
    histograms i'm getting. i don't want to be crying
    "wolf" so i'll only post results and code when i know
    a bit more: being able to show correlations between
    input data and output data - independent of the key -
    is _really_ really serious "oops" that i'd better be
    damn sure about, first.

    l.

    .


  • Next message: lkcl: "Re: advice sought on key/data histogram analysis of rijndael/128 and serpent"