Prev: On the general benefits of introducing dynamics into encryption processing
Next: A Modern Reappraisal of the One-Time Pad Cipher.
From: adacrypt on 1 May 2010 16:23

A random set means all the elements of the set having equal
probability of being the next one to be called in an unbiased
retrieval system. A legally authorised person will have a computer
program that legitimately does the calling in just such a retrieval
system. Typically in cryptography this retrieval system translates
also as the illegal experiments by a cryptanalyst to correctly guess
the correct operand to use in his attempts at illegally decrypting a
ciphertext string. Randomness causes total uncertainty in his mind
about which one to choose and the fallout benefit of this is ‘security
of communication’ for the cryptographer.

The ciphertext string itself may not be random by the definition of
having equal probability but that is not the issue here and it won’t
be random if there are repeats of some elements of the ciphertext
string that cause the general frequency spread to be uneven. That is
not important, it is the hidden encryption key inside the computer
that has to be random because this is the set of operands (among
others) that the cryptanalyst is in the dark about.

Contrary to expectations a random set can be keyed in directly by
inspection and given a cursory scrambling just to allay any fears that
it has consecutive order that a cryptanalyst could detect even by a
wild shot in the dark. The efficacy of the scrambling is not
important, there is so much uncertainty about every thing in the
limited access of the cryptanalyst that he can only assume total
disarray in the data hidden from his view and how well they are
scrambled cannot be questioned.

There are many books available on randomness and I have yet to find
one that categorically defines and demonstrates how to achieve
randomness, the authors repeat themselves over and over again,
reinforcing the falsehood that random is haphazard from cover to cover
with thousands of worthless dramatic examples.

The Penguin dictionary of Mathematics states what scientific
randomness is in a few lines, it also states that there is also a sort
of secondary kitchen table randomness that passes for scientific
randomness and implies it is a colloquial property that is more
romantic than scientific. I personally call this latter randomness
‘kitchen table’ randomness because it is there that a lot of people
are first introduced to randomness in playing board games as a child.
I don’t want the word haphazard aka random to disappear out of our
vocabulary but it needs to be thoroughly understood in crypto circles
that this style of randomness is not workable in mathematics.

In cryptography there is only one understanding of randomness and that
is the scientific randomness of equal probability.

It is a source of amusing conjecture to me how scientific randomness
ever became associated with haphazard and I think I will venture a
theory on this and let readers mull on it privately.

The Hypothesis of random becoming confused with haphazard.

In days of yore long before the advent of computers people needed
randomness almost as much as today. They knew that it meant a
completely unbiased collection process to compose a random set of
elements, otherwise they would end up with many repeats that they
unconsciously favoured without their own realisation and the set would
not be truly random per se.

It would have been impossible for them to shed themselves completely
of this very human emotion (think about this) so they relinquished
that responsibility to external occurrences that would absolve them of
all responsibility in the matter of being unbiased and so haphazard
was born as the externally sporadic collection of events that were
mostly irregular spontaneous occurrences in nature.

As time went on haphazard seems to have become synonymous with
randomness and even after the arrival of computers when biased-ness is
easy to achieve it is still here.

Comment.
I like the romance of haphazard and will always vote for it stay but
it is important not to confuse it with scientific randomness that is
so important in cryptography. This latter randomness translates as
uncertainty to the illegal adversary and is the key to all modern
cryptography.

We can thank Major Joseph Mauborgne who was head of Cryptography
Research for the US army in 1920 for its inception into modern
cryptography.

Note:- The Sumerians (early Iraqi people – 3000 BC) invented
mathematics to get culpable randomness out of their daily lives. -
adacrypt
From: WTShaw on 1 May 2010 17:06
On May 1, 3:23 pm, adacrypt <austin.oby...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> A random set means all the elements of the set having equal
> probability of being the next one to be called in an unbiased
> retrieval system.  A legally authorised person will have a computer
> program that legitimately does the calling in just such a retrieval
> system.

Trust and authority models...not good

> ... it is the hidden encryption key inside the computer
> that has to be random because this is the set of operands (among
> others) that the cryptanalyst is in the dark about.

And those who aren't can abuse it.
>
....
> In cryptography there is only one understanding of randomness and that
> is the scientific randomness of equal probability.
>
> It is a source of amusing conjecture to me how scientific randomness
> ever became associated with haphazard and I think I will venture a
> theory on this and let readers mull on it privately.

There are haphazard device that do render data.

Many years ago, my wife and I went to the opening of a drug store in
Grandview. Several people were present and the collection of entries
for the door prizes were maybe a hundred or more as people had
registered for several days.

At drawing time, the owners contemplated who would draw and after
explaining the task to a toddler, she reached in and grabbed several
submissions and promptly tried to eat them, all but two falling to the
floor, those remaining in her mouth which she was beginning to chew.
The made her stop and forced her mouth open. She cried but they got
the papers which happen to be two in number. I said, "Just use those,"

The entries, guess whose they were. I picked out a new fishing rod
and reel and according to wife just now, she went for a beautiful
pressed-glass cake stand. What are the odds?


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: On the general benefits of introducing dynamics into encryption processing
Next: A Modern Reappraisal of the One-Time Pad Cipher.