Re: QC-proof cipher?

laura fairhead wrote:
One thing I wonder is people always say this about OTP but what
is the difference between OTP and a NULL cipher. ie; OTP is secure
100% provably but if and only if your secure channel you trade
the key on is 100% secure, so you could just send your plaintext
data down the secure channel and dummy data (a pdf of applied
cryptography say <g> ) down the main untrusted channel, surely
it is the same and thus the OTP is worthless (at least under
that defn. ) ??

In general, OTP key is not sent via the same channel, but rather
is distribuited in advance using some more secure (but less
convenient) means such as by courier.
.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: SecuriKey
    ... and if you can send the Securikey ... > via a secure channel at the same time as the message, ... > the OTP. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: QC-proof cipher?
    ... is the difference between OTP and a NULL cipher. ... 100% provably but if and only if your secure channel you trade ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: the FBI and 1 time pads
    ... >> encryption), ... > Not quite - Having a secure channel doesn't mean we will have it at ... With an OTP, ... We can use our secure channel to pass ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: the FBI and 1 time pads
    ... > encryption), ... Not quite - Having a secure channel doesn't mean we will have it at ... With an OTP, ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Erasing an OTP file on a SD card.
    ... I implemented One Time Pad under AES 256 bits CBC ... In our system you can't use OTP alone. ... secure than other systems, but in the worst case it has no advantage ...
    (sci.crypt)
Quantcast