Prev: Using a kind of running accumulation of ciphertext as chainingvalue of encryption
Next: scripts for Tate pairing
From: Tom St Denis on 13 Mar 2010 08:05
On Mar 13, 7:23 am, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote:
> I like to restate the improvements in my humber view of our scheme
> over the well-known encryption with CBC MAC: (1) it uses one key
> instead of two. (2) the chaining values in the proper processing of the
> plaintext to generate ciphertext is unknown to the analyst (in the case
> of using CBC MAC, the chaining values are the ciphertext blocks, which
> are available to the analyst).

Um, first off, traditional CBC-MAC uses three keys, OMAC (the current
NIST approved CBC-MAC mode btw) uses a single key.

Second, in CBC-MAC intermittent output is NOT available to the
attacker because you'd not use the same key for CBC-MAC and CBC
encryption.

The real question is who knows more about cryptography, MKS or the
script writers for Swordfish.... I'm kinda at a loss to decide.

Tom
From: Maaartin on 13 Mar 2010 13:35
On Mar 13, 1:23 pm, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote:
> It may be remarked that this group is for free discussions and is not
> a "course" in an education institution (school etc.). Thus nobody has
> the "right" to take on the position of a "teacher". It is all very well
> that one attempts to help others to learn during discussions. However,
> if unfortunately his "pupil" turns out to be too "stipid" in his view
> ("unbelehrbar" in German, I don't know a good English translation),

According to my dictionary: obstinate, unteachable, unconvincable.
But ignorant is - according to my poor english - good enough.

> then he should stop such attempts after at most a couple of "failed"
> trials (and even better not starting "teaching" in the first place, if
> he has seen that others have failed before him in such attempts). In
> any case, a good teacher (whose study includes courses on pedagogical
> psychology) avoids using words that work insulting to the feeling of

It depends on the kind of school. As you're posting at least since
1999, you should have left primary school a long time ago. University
teachers get neither pedagogical nor psychology courses. Btw., some of
them sometimes say really bad things to their stundents like "you
should better become a bricklayer", but only seldom (and they're
right).

> the recipient. Therefore, I conclude that a few persons in this group,
> who frequently "want" to "teach" others but employing sacarstic or even
> very bad words are in fact not ones that "genuinely" want to help
> others but ones actually having some "non-outspoken" personal
> intentions in pretending to be "good-minded" persons helping others,
> while practically wasting the bandwidth of the group (i.e. spamming).

Being a bit rude or sarcastic is often the only way how to really help
some people, but not always it helps.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Using a kind of running accumulation of ciphertext as chainingvalue of encryption
Next: scripts for Tate pairing