1994-03-24 - Re: A possibility…

Header Data

From: gtoal@an-teallach.com (Graham Toal)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: aee5aa7488f7b6c3073f5b8664820cd027bd15542fa2c0ec552c5443c2bd9e9d
Message ID: <199403241222.MAA26862@an-teallach.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-03-24 12:23:41 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 24 Mar 94 04:23:41 PST

Raw message

From: gtoal@an-teallach.com (Graham Toal)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 94 04:23:41 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: A possibility...
Message-ID: <199403241222.MAA26862@an-teallach.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


:What I am thinking is to have one person encrypt using a RNG (noise). He
:encrypts his message using the noise on one channel and then copies the noise
:utilized on another channel. He then mixes the two channels to 
:create....noise.

What you mean is generating a random one-time-pad, encrypting with that pad,
and sending the pad to the recipient via secure means.  I think it has been
done before :-)  If your idea of sending the 'random noise' is something
electronic rather than a black bag, then all you've done is re-invent
security through obscurity and your program is little more than hiding
plaintext with a stego program.

:On the other side the person must be expecting the noise and must know how to
:seperate the signal. It seems that this leaves things open by having the
:encryption key along with the message, but the message itself is just noise.
:(i.e. the interloper must know of the signal, and know how to split it into
:it's two components.)

Oops.  Sure sounds like you meant the security through obscurity option...

:::::Comments?

You design anything important for Microsoft then???

G





Thread