From: nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com
To: Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>
Message Hash: f0d7a74292b2a8791691d2b99a1f0703c2ba51dc34866f8a383b2626787ca7a1
Message ID: <97Aug13.172635edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970813145505.7599M-100000@beast.brainlink.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-13 21:36:30 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 05:36:30 +0800
From: nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 05:36:30 +0800
To: Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>
Subject: Re: Encrypting same data with many keys...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970813145505.7599M-100000@beast.brainlink.com>
Message-ID: <97Aug13.172635edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Wed, 13 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 1997 nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com wrote:
>
> In terms of padding does it matter WHERE I put the padding info? Is it
> better to put random stuff in the front or at the end? The reason I ask,
> say that you're going to encrypt an N byte block where N is bigger than
> your block cypher's key size?
>
> If my intution is correct, and you have the same data encrypted with many
> keys (even RSA) but have the padding at the end, the 1st block would still
> be breakable. I suppose putting the data at the end would also result in
> the same kind of problem, though it might be a bit harder to attack than
> putting the data 1st...
>
> Would it not make sense to scatter the random padding throughout the
> block? How is this normally done? Front? Back? Middle? Scattered?
The location does not matter. The standard RSA libs place the padding at
the front - it is one of those PKCS specifications.
You would simply need to break the conventional key down to a few bytes
smaller than the modulus size, so each would be padded with a few random
bytes.
--- reply to tzeruch - at - ceddec - dot - com ---
Return to August 1997
Return to “Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>”