Updating the Historic OTP.
in [Cryptography]
|
Prev: A C-code for permutation polynomials mod 2^n
Next: On selection of polynomials for the Multiple Polynomial Quadratic Sieve
From: Bruce Stephens on 24 Mar 2010 17:01 Mark Murray <w.h.oami(a)example.com> writes: > On 24/03/2010 08:01, adacrypt wrote: >> characters numbered 32 to 126 inclusive => 95 characters > > Why? Apart from anything else it means you're leaking paragraph lengths (and likely line-lengths, presuming one uses lines). That's the kind of thing that you definitely shouldn't be doing. [...]
From: WTShaw on 25 Mar 2010 01:54 On Mar 24, 10:17 am, rossum <rossu...(a)coldmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:33:21 +0000, Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> > wrote: > > >On 24/03/2010 08:01, adacrypt wrote: > >> characters numbered 32 to 126 inclusive => 95 characters > > >Why? > > >Any binary will do. ASCII, EBCDIC(yuk!), UTF-8, UTF-16, UniCode, > >KOI8-R, JPEG, MP3 or whatever. The message needs to have no structure > >apart from that agreed upon by the communicants. > > >The OTP then views the message as a stream of bits and XORs the > >key (a bunch of random bits as long as the message, and shared > >with the receiver) to create the cryptogram. > > >M > > Adacrypt seems to have an obsession with ASCII and appears to be > unable to realise that dealing with general binary data is far more > useful and covers a far wider range of situations. Also excludes many things that don't do well with binary. Try whistling in binary based notes; be the first to do so. > > Perhaps this is due to an overreliance on pen and paper cyphers. He > does mention Vigenere a lot but never seems to make the leap to a 256 > x 256 Vigenere grid for byte level encoding. > > rossum I really favor Beaufort of the three bad choices for a simple table cipher.
From: WTShaw on 25 Mar 2010 02:01 On Mar 24, 4:01 pm, Bruce Stephens <bruce+use...(a)cenderis.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> writes: > > On 24/03/2010 08:01, adacrypt wrote: > >> characters numbered 32 to 126 inclusive => 95 characters > > > Why? > > Apart from anything else it means you're leaking paragraph lengths (and > likely line-lengths, presuming one uses lines). That's the kind of > thing that you definitely shouldn't be doing. > > [...] Given that information, which could be wrong on purpose, solving it might be a dare to try to illustrate the strength of a system.
From: WTShaw on 25 Mar 2010 02:04 On Mar 24, 4:01 pm, Bruce Stephens <bruce+use...(a)cenderis.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> writes: > > On 24/03/2010 08:01, adacrypt wrote: > >> characters numbered 32 to 126 inclusive => 95 characters > > > Why? > > Apart from anything else it means you're leaking paragraph lengths (and > likely line-lengths, presuming one uses lines). That's the kind of > thing that you definitely shouldn't be doing. > > [...] Spacingo fwords ca nbe easil yr eversed.
From: Boon on 25 Mar 2010 04:08
WTShaw wrote: > rossum wrote: > >> Adacrypt seems to have an obsession with ASCII and appears to be >> unable to realise that dealing with general binary data is far more >> useful and covers a far wider range of situations. > > Also excludes many things that don't do well with binary. Try > whistling in binary based notes; be the first to do so. How is audio encoded on YOUR compact discs? What is it about sci(ENTIFIC).crypt(OLOGY) that draws so many kooks, cranks, and non-understanders? |