1995-12-03 - Re: Cypher secure versus computationally unbounded adversary

Header Data

From: SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
To: solman@MIT.EDU
Message Hash: 3faad109fab123099d6223b59756733ea2daa1afebd80461b40e83e797d59996
Message ID: <95Dec3.091041edt.1000@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
Reply To: <9512021931.AA01944@ua.MIT.EDU>
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-03 14:10:26 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 3 Dec 95 06:10:26 PST

Raw message

From: SINCLAIR  DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 95 06:10:26 PST
To: solman@MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: Cypher secure versus computationally unbounded adversary
In-Reply-To: <9512021931.AA01944@ua.MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <95Dec3.091041edt.1000@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> Hi all,
> 
> I've just come up with a method for implementing and encryption algorithm
> that is absolutely secure from passive attacks by a computationally
> unbounded adversary. Is this a new capability, or am I reinventing the
> wheel here?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jason W. Solinsky

That is certainly new.  Infact, I think there are proofs that say you 
can't do it.  I'm positive you can't do it if the plaintext does not
have maximum entropy.  So, tell us your scheme.




Thread