Re: Basic tools of encryption: Transposition and substitution?
- From: Mike Amling <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:05:39 GMT
Doug wrote:
I was involved in a project about 2 years ago where we implemented DES from scratch, did some other funky PGP based stuff and as I recall from then, as with Singh the basic tools of encryption were always Transposition and Substitution.
Now, it strikes me as odd that compression doesn't fall into this category as well. Surely compression is a highly effective crypto technique: by reducing the size of the cypher text compared to the plain text, you make it much more difficult to break the code.
Compression itself doesn't have a key. If you send a compressed message, what is it that keeps eavesdroppers from being able to read it? Secrecy of algorithm?
Furthermore, as you approach perfect compression the compressed data approaches pure random data (because in theory any pattern can be used to further compress the data).
Why doesn't compression fall in as one of the basic crypt techniques?
Because well-implemented encryption provides confidentiality and authentication of any message, regardless of whether it's been compressed or not. Hence, it's convenient to regard compression and encryption as independent.
--Mike Amling .
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Launch of CryptoDox
- Previous by thread: Re: Basic tools of encryption: Transposition and substitution?
- Next by thread: Quadibloc Ciphers Illustrated Again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|