From: zane@genesis.mcs.com (Sameer)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 11:34:40 PDT
To: "George A. Gleason" <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
Subject: Re:  OTP dual decryption
In-Reply-To: <93Jun21.003959pdt.14001-3@well.sf.ca.us>
Message-ID: <m0o7qY1-000MU6C@genesis.mcs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


In message <93Jun21.003959pdt.14001-3@well.sf.ca.us>, "George A. Gleason" writes:
>
> interesting... If I understand you; it's keep your DES key in your head, and
> use the DES cyphertext to create an appropriate OTP key that decrypts back
> to something innocuous.  good.  The thing is, to make this credible, we
> still need an OTP program which is in general use for communications.  
	Yeah. OTP's seem awfully cumbersome.

> 
> Now here's another possible problem.  Let's say that They are tapping you
> and grab all the cyphertext of your actual communications.  Now they grab
> your hard drive and what they get is a different batch of cyphertext.  That
> in and of itself might call up some suspicions.  Any solution in sight...?
	Hmm? I don't understand this problem. There's only one set of
cyphertext.. the actual cyphertext. Do you mean "different batch of
cyphertext" as the OTP which creates the innocuous plaintext from the
cyphertext? Maybe encrypt the OTP w/DES and keep it on your hard drive.
When "they" snag the drive, they see the different cyphertext, you tell
them that it's the OTP you used and give them the DES-key to decrypt the
innocuous OTP.
	I sense a problem with histogram equalization, however. Is there a
problem here or does OTP-encryption take care of that? 

--
| Sameer Parekh-zane@genesis.MCS.COM-PFA related mail to pfa@genesis.MCS.COM |
| Apprentice Philosopher, Writer, Physicist, Healer, Programmer, Lover, more |
| "Symbiosis is Good" - Me_"Specialization is for Insects" - R. A. Heinlein_/
 \_______________________/ \______________________________________________/