1996-10-04 - Re: DESCrack keyspace partitioning

Header Data

From: Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>
To: “geeman@best.com>
Message Hash: c7915ae7c5773491ef02cf4a14da86fcee657d71cf0302ad8bfaedab1f2927fc
Message ID: <325550B5.7CCD@tivoli.com>
Reply To: <01BBB1D1.968E25C0@geeman.vip.best.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-04 21:51:17 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 05:51:17 +0800

Raw message

From: Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 05:51:17 +0800
To: "geeman@best.com>
Subject: Re: DESCrack keyspace partitioning
In-Reply-To: <01BBB1D1.968E25C0@geeman.vip.best.com>
Message-ID: <325550B5.7CCD@tivoli.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


geeman@best.com wrote:
> 
> Another thinking step: most real-world DES keys are derived from 
> hashes. Not (P)RNGs.

Hashes?  Hashes of what?

> The distributions are **not** uniform.

Then that's a wonderful weakness in the cryptosystem.  Let's fix it.

> The goal is to search the most likely keys first, and
> not all keys are created equally.

Any cryptosystem for which one can compute likely vs. unlikely keys
has already been partially compromised.

______c_________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * IBM % Tivoli * Austin TX  * How quickly we forget that
mailto:m5@tivoli.com mailto:m101@io.com  * "deer processing" and "data
http://www.io.com/~m101/                 * processing" are different!





Thread