From: Matthew J Ghio <mg5n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 13:30:56 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: anonymous mail
In-Reply-To: <199402272002.MAA17115@mail.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <MhQF3mK00awVM_vEcT@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Karl Barrus wrote:

> Well, you do have to be careful: a large number of keys doesn't
> mean a cipher is hard to break, there may be a faster method
> than brute force.  For instance, those cryptograms some papers
> print in the puzzle section are a simple substition cipher, with
> 26! keys... yet they are also pretty much trivially breakable
> with enough input.

Quite true!  However, as I pointed out, I tried very hard to eliminate
all such possibilities that would allow simplifying the key search
process.  It's also very easy to modify the program to support a larger
key and additional encryption rounds.