Re: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- From: David Eather <eather@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 01:09:02 +1000
Jean-François Michaud wrote:
Since it is easier in practice to use pseudo random data than to
generate random data which is then distributed as appropriate if we
have OTP in mind,
Forget about OTP. You are describing a stream cipher.
would
encrypting messages à la OTP with 'pseudo random data' using a key
greater than the message make any sense to increase security,
Yes and no - but mostly no.
No. A thing called the unicity distance will enable the attacker with good probability to tell that he has the right message.
Yes. The attacker has several places he may have to try and start.
Embassies and highly secure line do something a lot better they send true random data 24/7 and insert messages when ever they have to. This denies signal intelligence to any observer.
The it is not like stego.
This process is akin to steganography except the message is known to be
encrypted amongst a sea of junk.
When anyone tries to help you, you just hurl abuse. So I'm going back to bed after I snip the rest.
(snip)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- From: Jean-François Michaud
- Re: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- From: Jean-François Michaud
- Re: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- References:
- Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- From: Jean-François Michaud
- Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Mystery partially solved (was Microsoft does it again?!)
- Next by Date: Re: Was the Abwehr Enigma-G stronger than the normal Enigma, due to the rotating reflector?
- Previous by thread: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- Next by thread: Re: Encryption key longer than text to encrypt
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|