From: The Deviant <deviant@pooh-corner.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 06:19:09 -0800 (PST)
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: IPG Algorith Broken!
In-Reply-To: <199611240241.SAA29110@netcom6.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.94.961124141239.15389B-100000@random.sp.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 23 Nov 1996, Bill Frantz wrote:

> At  4:21 PM 11/23/96 -0800, John Anonymous MacDonald wrote:
> >At 12:33 PM 11/23/1996, Eric Murray wrote:
> >>You point could have been that the same problem exists
> >>for proofs- that next week someone could come up
> >>with a way to prove, for all time, that an algorithim
> >>really IS unbreakable.  So, to cover that posibility
> >>I should have said "it's currently impossible to
> >>prove an algorithim unbreakable". :-)
> >
> >Or, more accurately, nobody credible has seen such a proof.  But, a
> >clever person might invent one.
> 
> I thought Shannon proved one-time-pads to be unbreakable using information
> theory.

Different ball game.  OTP isn't "unbreakable" .  OTPs are secure because
no matter what key you use, it _will_ decrypt, so your plaintext is still
hidden simply because it could decrypt to whatever the person trying to
decrypt it wants it to.  Its not that its unbreakable, its that its
breakable in _so many ways_.  

 --Deviant
   PGP KeyID = E820F015 Fingerprint = 3D6AAB628E3DFAA9 F7D35736ABC56D39

Do, or do not; there is no try.
		-- Yoda


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMphYvDCdEh3oIPAVAQGVWQf/UGedrHA9F0wqBBn0aUGNpP/0D2TOVTGm
JBKhsCHoACMhowkHGMSEumnWQZ8mJ1pUAht306p2smVd+XWqRia1c73fwES+a/9X
PEjaW3f6e8vsGnfQBlft0gEtaGzbwN9Dpbg01qxbpsLo9G0WqcrK8mHbOUISODjl
uyRbVZXvpdL88pNMDsoc/4p1MhTY+2eYZvp/CSfQZNjn+mSnD8MVO/EyFSfWj5t2
oEiO1R+h0xN6KHPwv8jDybuelbs8voCHEDY5rDFGB5VKsI+9nqStPwUVb39S0Vec
z5UPdrUUpfXP1aGxASYN9A88OLhzR00zCvtOPB/cp48FS6zC1PcH/A==
=7Ik9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----