Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Jeff Dege <jdege@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:57:12 -0600
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:53:03 -0500, Mike Amling wrote:
Kind a weak example. Valerie (a spy with more experience than Alice)
would have shown Eve a 400k ascii text.
If you're going to avoid traffic analysis, you'd be sending a couple of
MBs of random junk to random people, every day, automatically.
"Bob? I don't know Bob. Is he signed up with the 'I want to participate
in the random-noise-to-confuse-traffic-analysis-group'? My computer
probably sent him some random junk automatically. I didn't have anything
to do with it!"
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that worked ...A complex system designed from scratch never
works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over,
beginning with a working simple system.
-- Grady Booch
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Mike Amling
- Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- References:
- Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Bjorn Edstrom
- Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Alan
- Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Kristian Gjøsteen
- Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- From: Mike Amling
- Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- Prev by Date: Re: help needed
- Next by Date: Re: help needed
- Previous by thread: Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- Next by thread: Re: Preprocessing a highly redudant message before encryption
- Index(es):