1996-03-11 - Re: Cryptanalysis
Header Data
From: Mike Tighe <tighe@spectrum.titan.com>
To: EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Message Hash: 165ffd56f817bed325d7a12d0e35d8f0aa3c240e3570f94deed2a5148a63b06e
Message ID: <199603111510.JAA18870@softserv.tcst.com>
Reply To: <01I25ASYNMT6AKTUGH@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-11 15:49:54 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 23:49:54 +0800
Raw message
From: Mike Tighe <tighe@spectrum.titan.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 23:49:54 +0800
To: EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Subject: Re: Cryptanalysis
In-Reply-To: <01I25ASYNMT6AKTUGH@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <199603111510.JAA18870@softserv.tcst.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>There are very good reasons to say little about "conventional
>cryptanalysis": it just doesn't matter much with modern ciphers, such as
>public key systems. Modern ciphers don't fall to conventional attacks based
>on word frequency, pattern analysis, etc.
I disagree with this, and think that in the next 10-25 years we will find
that most of the systems we are using today were as easily broken as the
systems of yester-year (Enigma, Japanese Codes ,etc).
Thread
Return to March 1996
- Return to ““E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>”
Return to “Mike Tighe <tighe@spectrum.titan.com>”
- 1996-03-10 (Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:30:56 +0800) - Re: Cryptanalysis - “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
- 1996-03-11 (Mon, 11 Mar 1996 23:49:54 +0800) - Re: Cryptanalysis - Mike Tighe <tighe@spectrum.titan.com>