Is there a Mathematician Cryptographr in the House.
in [Cryptography]
|
Prev: fire seal with video
Next: Last Call for Papers Reminder (extended): World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science WCECS 2010
From: adacrypt on 20 Jul 2010 10:51 On Jul 20, 3:38 pm, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: > adacrypt wrote: > >> S1: a character sequence of lengeh L that is either directly taken > > > from SR1 or is a modified version of a part of SR1. > > > S1 is effectively equal to SR1 - i.e. SR1 is comprised of multiples > > of the 95 subset of ASCII according to the message length - the round > > number of modules are combined into one array. When this array is > > scrambled it becomes S1. > > >> (1) If L<14250, which part of SR1 will be taken for processing? Under > >> which condition is it not modified? If it needs to be modified, how? > > > All of it since S1 is in essence SR1 after scrambling and has to be > > equal to the message length it will all be required in order to > > satisfy the caveat "key length = Messagelength" - the only > > 'modifying' as such is the fact of its being positionally scrambled > > according to parameters decided by Alice. If you call scrambling > > 'modifying' then it is up to Alice - she decides on when the > > scarmbling parameters are changed - that could be at midnight every > > day or even every single message instantaneously - she calls the > > shots, the partners (I prefer to call them entities) don't 'agree' to > > anything - Alice is the boss. - she may decide not to scarmble, > > modify?', as you put it, at will or as prudence guides her. > > Is it that one scrambles the whole of SR1 from time to time on the > command of one partner? If so, which part of the scrambled SR1 is to be > used for a particular message? Your ADA code in the other post is > loaded in my view with too much implementation dependent context to > be readily understood for me. Anyway it seems to be a rather > 'straightforward' permutation in comparision to permutations that are > based on pséudo-random numbers. So, dependent on how the S1 is going > to be used (which is yet to be clarified) its quality may be > questionable IMHO. > > >> (2) How does one compute the integer sequence S2? > > > I have given you the details of how to set the bounds of the range of > > N's - regarding how to compute the sequence the background theory > > behind this has its origins in the Vigenere Cipher and in the Vigenere > > square of that cipher being 1) populated by the printable subset of > > ASCII and 2) the square is made mobile in the fourth quadrant of the > > XY plane. This is far to difficult to convey to you by post. > > If you couldn't/wouldn't clearly explain a part of your algorithm, why > should people in this group study your algorithm at all? Should they > 'believe' that the algorithm is superior or is even a wonder, because it > is so complicated that even its author fails to present it in a proper > form? > > > I have no intention of withholding my stuff from anyone and especially > > with the aim of playing cat 'n mouse but there is alimit to how much I > > can describe here - you could on the other hand just take my algorithm > > as a detached piece of number work that describes the rule of a speial > > sequence that yields a desired result. > > > I regret if this isn't helpful to you and will be pleased to try again > > anytime. > > > I think you would find it profitable to concentrate on the core > > algorithm theory and leave the management aspects until later. > > If the algorithm employs S1 and S2 and these are variable (different > for different messages), then they belong evidently to the core! > > M. K. Shen- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Hi, I don't need your patronising nonsensense - ther's nothing in it for me to try to help you - I suspect your not able to assimilate whats being gifted to you and this is your escape hatch - There is no need for me to go on the defensive - there's already huge interest from abroad - Bye - adacrypt
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 20 Jul 2010 11:03 adacrypt wrote: > On Jul 20, 3:38 pm, Mok-Kong Shen<mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: >> adacrypt wrote: >>>> S1: a character sequence of lengeh L that is either directly taken >>> > from SR1 or is a modified version of a part of SR1. >> >>> S1 is effectively equal to SR1 - i.e. SR1 is comprised of multiples >>> of the 95 subset of ASCII according to the message length - the round >>> number of modules are combined into one array. When this array is >>> scrambled it becomes S1. >> >>>> (1) If L<14250, which part of SR1 will be taken for processing? Under >>>> which condition is it not modified? If it needs to be modified, how? >> >>> All of it since S1 is in essence SR1 after scrambling and has to be >>> equal to the message length it will all be required in order to >>> satisfy the caveat "key length = Messagelength" - the only >>> 'modifying' as such is the fact of its being positionally scrambled >>> according to parameters decided by Alice. If you call scrambling >>> 'modifying' then it is up to Alice - she decides on when the >>> scarmbling parameters are changed - that could be at midnight every >>> day or even every single message instantaneously - she calls the >>> shots, the partners (I prefer to call them entities) don't 'agree' to >>> anything - Alice is the boss. - she may decide not to scarmble, >>> modify?', as you put it, at will or as prudence guides her. >> >> Is it that one scrambles the whole of SR1 from time to time on the >> command of one partner? If so, which part of the scrambled SR1 is to be >> used for a particular message? Your ADA code in the other post is >> loaded in my view with too much implementation dependent context to >> be readily understood for me. Anyway it seems to be a rather >> 'straightforward' permutation in comparision to permutations that are >> based on ps�udo-random numbers. So, dependent on how the S1 is going >> to be used (which is yet to be clarified) its quality may be >> questionable IMHO. >> >>>> (2) How does one compute the integer sequence S2? >> >>> I have given you the details of how to set the bounds of the range of >>> N's - regarding how to compute the sequence the background theory >>> behind this has its origins in the Vigenere Cipher and in the Vigenere >>> square of that cipher being 1) populated by the printable subset of >>> ASCII and 2) the square is made mobile in the fourth quadrant of the >>> XY plane. This is far to difficult to convey to you by post. >> >> If you couldn't/wouldn't clearly explain a part of your algorithm, why >> should people in this group study your algorithm at all? Should they >> 'believe' that the algorithm is superior or is even a wonder, because it >> is so complicated that even its author fails to present it in a proper >> form? >> >>> I have no intention of withholding my stuff from anyone and especially >>> with the aim of playing cat 'n mouse but there is alimit to how much I >>> can describe here - you could on the other hand just take my algorithm >>> as a detached piece of number work that describes the rule of a speial >>> sequence that yields a desired result. >> >>> I regret if this isn't helpful to you and will be pleased to try again >>> anytime. >> >>> I think you would find it profitable to concentrate on the core >>> algorithm theory and leave the management aspects until later. >> >> If the algorithm employs S1 and S2 and these are variable (different >> for different messages), then they belong evidently to the core! >> >> M. K. Shen- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Hi, I don't need your patronising nonsensense - ther's nothing in it > for me to try to help you - I suspect your not able to assimilate > whats being gifted to you and this is your escape hatch - There is no > need for me to go on the defensive - there's already huge interest > from abroad - Bye - adacrypt You recall me of what I as a boy observed on a town market, where a certain "doctor" was advertising a "wonder" medicament of unrevealed/obscure constituents but claimed to be almost a cure-all. Make your big business nationally and internationally but don't ask again people of the group to examine your "algorithm"! M. K. Shen
From: Maaartin on 20 Jul 2010 12:17 On Jul 20, 5:03 pm, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: > > Hi, I don't need your patronising nonsensense - ther's nothing in it > > for me to try to help you - I suspect your not able to assimilate > > whats being gifted to you and this is your escape hatch - There is no > > need for me to go on the defensive - there's already huge interest > > from abroad - Bye - adacrypt > > You recall me of what I as a boy observed on a town market, where a > certain "doctor" was advertising a "wonder" medicament of > unrevealed/obscure constituents but claimed to be almost a cure-all. > Make your big business nationally and internationally but don't ask > again people of the group to examine your "algorithm"! It took you ages, didn't it? Anyway, I hope you've got the clue now. Before you start to discuss with JSH, he's the same case, just much less amusing.
From: jbriggs444 on 20 Jul 2010 13:16 On Jul 20, 9:55 am, adacrypt <austin.oby...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 20, 10:14 am, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: > > > Mok-Kong Shen wrote: > > > adacrypt wrote: > > > [2 posts combined] > > > I posted the previous post without reading another post of yours > > containing: > > > > Explanation of scrambling. > > > There are two variables called "Step" and "Repeat" - when the > > > Please give for the scrambling of the sequence taken from SR1 a > > pseudo-code in the style of C (or of ADA). > > > M. K. Shen > > Hi, > > PROCEDURE Load_n_Scramble_Encryption_Keys IS > --pre; Package called "Key_Pad_Characters_Mark_150 " is created > --post; current program keys are loaded > > Repeats : CONSTANT Positive := 285;-- Keys scrambling parameters > Step : CONSTANT Positive := 50; -- Step x Repeats <= 14250 > > BEGIN -- Text_Load_n_Scramble > FOR I IN 1 .. 14250 LOOP > A(I):= Key_Pad_Characters_Mark_150.Num_TO_Char(Numin => I); > B(I):= Key_Pad_Characters_Mark_150.Num_TO_Char(Numin => I); > END LOOP; This initializes two arrays, A and B. Each array is apparently a string of 14,250 characters. There is apparently an external "Num_TO_Char" function that can fold numbers in the range 1 through 14250 into characters in the printable subset that you have chosen to employ. Presumably it operates in part by taking the input modulo 95. So A(1) is the encoding of 1, A(2) is the encoding of 2, A(3) is the encoding of 3 and A(14250) is the encoding of 14250 [which is probably the same as the encoding of 95] > Z := 0; > FOR J IN 1 .. Repeats LOOP > FOR I IN REVERSE Z+1 .. Z+Step LOOP > Z:=Z+1; > B(Z) := A(I); > END LOOP; > END LOOP; > END Load_n_Scramble_Encryption_Keys; This is the heart of things. Now you are populating [part of] the B array with reversed blocks from the A array. Each block is "Step" characters in length. This is repeated "Repeats" times. (You just take "Step" characters from A, copy them to B in reverse order and repeat) Rather than dealing with a partial block at the end, you just leave that part of the B array (if any) untouched. So, for instance, if Steps were 4 and Repeats were 6 and you were working on a 26 character array, you would copy 24 characters from A = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" yielding B = "DCBAHGFELKJIPONMTSRQXWVUYZ" To summarize what has been accomplished by this code fragment: You have obtained an array of 14250 bytes of character data which has been determined entirely by two integer parameters: "Step" and "Repeats". Note that "Step" and "Repeats" are compile time constants. Taking the default conservative assumptions of a careful cryptographer, that would seem to take them out of the realm of "secret keying material" and put them in the realm of "assumed to be known to the attacker". So this entire "scrambled" array is, under careful assumptions, known to the attacker.
From: David Eather on 20 Jul 2010 21:06
On 18/07/2010 7:41 PM, adacrypt wrote: > > Both �Key� and �Plaintext� belong in the ASCII printable subset > (elements 32 to 126 incl � 95 elements) > > Treat these names �Key� and �Plaintext� as variable names in this > model. > > X is a positive integer. > > Consider now, > > [(X +Key) + (X +Plaintext)] (Mod N) = a residue (Mod N) > > Call, [(X +Key) + (X +Plaintext)], Sum. > > N must divide Sum just once (and once only) and leave the residue (Mod > N)>= 0 > > Every possible combination of key and Plaintext is to be considered as > usable for both key and plaintext at any instant. > > Then, question > > 1) > > What is the minimum starting value for X that enables any N to be > deduced � i.e. what is the value of this first N that satisfies the > equation, > > [(X +Key) + (X +Plaintext)] (Mod N) = a residue (Mod N)>= 0 > > What is the value of X that will give me a discreet number of N�s say > 14000. > > Theory. > > This is the algorithm that produces two sets of random keys in the > following cipher in modular arithmetic. > > Encryption. > > [(X +Key) + (X +Plaintext)] (Mod N) = a residue (Mod N)>=0 > > Cipher text = residue � N > Decryption. > > Decryption Key = residue + N > > Plaintext (as messagetext) = Ciphertext + 2N � Key > > Comment. > > This cipher comes from the same stable as your RSA cipher except that > this cipher is totally, utterly and irrefutably unbreakable by any > means. It is secured by two sets of random keys i.e. the set of > eponymous keys (Key) and the set of N�s. Each of these two sets of > random keys is made equal in length to the message length during > encryption. Each of these two sets of random keys is used only once > in any message. > > The cipher uses the concept of mutual database technology, i.e. the > keys are read in sequential order from the synchronised arrays in the > entities� databases. The plaintext is either read in from external > batch files (produced by non-specialist operators) or is keyed > interactively at the computer keyboard (by non-specialist operators). > The arrays are periodically �scrambled� and �sliced� in a controlled > way by the entities. > > If there are readers who are academics and would like to justify this > brainwave into formal presentation then I would welcome your interest > and contribution. > > As I see it. > > Residue, Ciphertext and Decryption key are congruent modulo N. > (editing restriction forces me to print it this way) > > There are N elements in each residue class, there N classes of > residue. > > It would be nice to formalise this using proper mathematical notation > but again the restrictions of this editor won�t go that far. How > would you do it just for comparison. > > Comment. > > This not a boring one-time pad cipher. > > This is a cipher for mathematicians. > > It is an adaptation of the Vigenere cipher that undocks the eponymous > square from its static position at (0,0) and moves it along the line Y > = - (X+x). > > The OTP is also another adaptation of the Vigenere cipher although > sadly, no one seems to realise this. Major Joseph Mauborgne who was > Head of the US Army Cryptological Research in 1920 did however and > designed the OTP in conjunction with his contemporary Gilbert Vernam. > > In my opinion, one of the first things that should have been done with > the inception of computer-driven cryptography is to have had another > look at the OTP that had become a popular joke paradox in the previous > half century. That is being done now albeit more a renaissance of the > Vigenere cipher than the OTP. > > May I repeat, this is not a One-Time Pad cipher despite the > resemblance in the caveats of the operation. Please don�t make any > comparison-based arguments. > > Please give this modular arithmetic your best shot, it is a cipher for > the future. > > The theory is fully expounded on my website http://www.scalarcryptography.co.uk > - adacrypt Ok. I have carefully read - http://www.adacrypt.com/downloads/A%20Computerised%20One-Time%20Pad.pdf I understand what you have written. From what you have written it is clear that you have no useful understanding of even basic cryptography. Not a single concept has been understood, described or implemented correctly. I am not being mean, nasty or exaggerating. Simply, it is not correct. |