Re: more hiddencredentials comments (Re: Brands' private credentials)

2004-05-10 Thread Adam Back
Gap may be I'm misunderstanding something about the HC approach. We have: P = (P1 or P2) is encoded HC_E(R,p) = {HC_E(R,P1),HC_E(R,P2)} so one problem is marking, the server sends you different R values: {HC_E(R,P1),HC_E(R',P2)} so you described one way to fix that by using symmetri

Re: more hiddencredentials comments (Re: Brands' private credentials)

2004-05-10 Thread Jason Holt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 10 May 2004, Adam Back wrote: > OK that sounds like it should work. Another approach that occurs is > you could just take the plaintext, and encrypt it for the other > attributes (which you don't have)? It's usually not too challenging > to

more hiddencredentials comments (Re: Brands' private credentials)

2004-05-10 Thread Adam Back
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 08:02:12PM +, Jason Holt wrote: > Adam Back wrote: > > [...] However the server could mark the encrypted values by encoding > > different challenge response values in each of them, right? > > Yep, that'd be a problem in that case. In the most recent (unpublished) > p