Re: Your secrets are safe with quasar encryption
How many suitable quasars are there? You'd be damn lucky if its a cryptograhic strength number. Now you might think there are limits to how many signals you can listen to and that would be some protection, however you still have brute force guess a signal, and probability of guessing the right key would be rather high compared to eg 2^-256 per guess with AES. Also they offer the strange comment The method does not require a large radio antenna or that the communicating parties be located in the same hemisphere, as radio signals can be broadcast over the internet at high speed. So if we are talking only about enough signals such that they can be continuosly monitored or a trusted server which monitors your subset for you... well then how do you secure the stream (ie if you send it over the internet AES encrypted, you'd just as well AES encrypt your data). Sounds more than a bit dubious overall. Adam On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 06:20:33PM -0800, Sean McGrath wrote: http://www.newscientisttech.com/article.ns?id=dn8913print=true Your secrets are safe with quasar encryption * 16:00 29 March 2006 * NewScientist.com news service * Will Knight Intergalactic radio signals from quasars could emerge as an exotic but effective new tool for securing terrestrial communications against eavesdropping. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Your secrets are safe with quasar encryption
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Sean McGrath wrote: He adds that the method does not require a large radio antenna or that the communicating parties be located in the same hemisphere, as radio signals can be broadcast over the internet at high speed. It sounds like encrypting $P$ by xoring it with random $K$ and sending both $P \Xor K$ and $K$ -- no very secure :-) -- Regards, ASK - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
Internet webcam signals from webcams could emerge as an exotic but effective new tool for securing terrestrial communications against eavesdropping. Scientists have come up with a method for encrypting messages using the internet objects, which emit signals and are thought to be powered by DC voltage. Scientists at the National Institute of Cool Security Ideas (NICSI) propose using the signals emitted by webcams to lock and unlock digital communications in a secure fashion. The researchers believe webcams could make an ideal cryptographic tool because the signals they emit are impossible to predict. Webcam-based cryptography is based on a physical fact that such a webcam signal is random and has a very broad frequency spectrum. NICSI scientists suggest using an agreed webcam signal to add randomness to a stream cipher. Each communicating party would only need to know which webcam to monitor and when to start in order to encrypt and decrypt a message. Without knowing the target webcam and time an eavesdropper should be unable to decrypt the message. NICSI scientists believes voyeur-cryptography could appeal to anyone who requires high-security communications. He adds that the method does not require a large radio antenna like quasar encryption because the signals exist already on the internet. Plus quasar signals are really boring compared to many webcam signals. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cfrg] HMAC-MD5
I (Hal Finney) wrote: A couple of (rather uninformed) thoughts regarding HMAC-MD5: First, how could collision attacks be extended to preimage attacks? And second, how would preimage attacks affect HMAC-MD5? I have to apologize for that message; I was totally confused particularly in the second part where I discussed the impact of an MD5 preimage break on HMAC-MD5. What I described was completely wrong and had nothing to do with an attack on HMAC-MD5. Luckily the message was so long and poorly written that hopefully few people were able to follow it well enough to be misled. Again, apologies. Hal Finney - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cfrg] HMAC-MD5
I think that we have the evidence. The security MD5 depends heavily on a lot of nonlinearities in functions F,G,I and on carries in arithmetic additions. Nonlinearities in F,G,I are bitwise and very weak. Carries are much stronger, but the collision attacks showed that it is possible to controll them also. New differential schemes (paths) could be proposed, new ways of controlling the interior variables of MD5 could be discovered. It could lead to the second preimage attacks and maybe further. Vlastimil Klima - PŮVODNÍ ZPRÁVA - Od: Victor Duchovni [EMAIL PROTECTED] Komu: cryptography@metzdowd.com Předmět: Re: [Cfrg] HMAC-MD5 Datum: 29.3.2006 - 21:14:06 On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:51:08AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In am nearly sure that a preimage attack (MD5) will be found in the next two or three years. Is there already evidence of progress in that direction? -- Viktor. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ! NOVINKA ! Vybruslete z jarni unavy! Inline brusle Nike za fantasticke ceny od 1999 Kc! http://www.sportobchod.cz/Prehled.php?kat1=10 - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: webcam encryption beats quasar encryption
Heyman, Michael wrote: Internet webcam signals from webcams could emerge as an exotic but effective new tool for securing terrestrial communications against eavesdropping. snip Kidding aside, there are some interesting theoretical results about ciphers that utilize a plentiful, publicly available source of random bits. See: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/context/238746/0 I think the Rip Van Winkle cipher was mentioned in Schneier's Applied Cryptography. Also, I vaguely recall another news story (1999?) that reported on an encryption technique that hypothesized a stream of random bits generated by an orbiting satellite. Quasar encryption is likely impractical, but there could be more to it than you think. However, I did think web cam encryption was funny. :-) -James -- James Muir, [EMAIL PROTECTED] School of Computer Science, Carleton University http://www.ccsl.carleton.ca/~jamuir - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
