From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: hoz@univel.telescan.com (rick hoselton)
Message Hash: 454a7d34d03ec9a00fd0ed412487cf273e347145fd0e4cafeefdc08a5e3ebfff
Message ID: <9507140229.AA13447@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <9507132338.AA07522@toad.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-07-14 02:29:39 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 19:29:39 PDT
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 19:29:39 PDT
To: hoz@univel.telescan.com (rick hoselton)
Subject: Re: def'n of "computer network"
In-Reply-To: <9507132338.AA07522@toad.com>
Message-ID: <9507140229.AA13447@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
rick hoselton writes:
> Perry, I don't understand. If the least significant bits in my gif file
> follow all the "known statistical distributions", how can anyone know
> whether they are "just noise" or are an encrypted message,
Indeed -- how could the recipient even know to look, unless these
things arrived regularly and with a fully standardized form of
stegonography, in which case why bother, all you've done is come up
with a very odd form of transfer encoding.
If the recipient does know to look, that implies either that there is
a hint, in which case the stegonography is useless, or it implies that
you have prearrangement, in which case my comments on prearrangement
hold.
.pm
Return to July 1995
Return to ““Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>”