Quote: |
_________________ "When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl." -- Kevin McCurley's Thought for the Day, June 24, 1997. |
Quote: |
bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
only outlaws will have privacy |
Semens wrote: |
Hi Justin,
Nice Math in the article. |
Semens wrote: | ||
Here it is . Steganography. Shift by 13.
|
theroguechemist wrote: |
New member... Little technical error pushed me to register...
Dear Semens, Steganography refers to "hidden writing," while cryptography refers to "secret writing." It was not steganography, it was cryptography, in this case, a substituion cipher, more specifically, a "Caesar shift," whereas k=+13; |
theroguechemist wrote: |
I am so much more superior that all of you. |
M3DU54 wrote: |
Justin, you sure know your crypto :) |
M3DU54 wrote: |
Just one question however... I've been sitting here for 30 mins thinking about the 'birthday paradox' and I can't find anything paradoxical about it. It makes perfect statistical sense and I can't make it conflict with itself. Am I missing something obvious here or is the only paradoxical thing about the 'birthday paradox' its name, on the basis that it isn't one ? |
Quote: |
Key Iteration Count First, we never use the user provided pass-phrase as is. We have to convert it to a usable key. The simplest way is to create a hash of the key using a message digest algorithm such as MD5 or SHA-1. The iteration count is the amount of times we perform this function to derive the final encryption key. In each step we take the previous hash result and hash it again. This is done to simply make it more time consuming for the attacker. An end user might not notice a 10 second delay during decryption however it could complicate things when you need to perform this 10 second function 30,000 times in a row. Since the attacker cannot perform the decryption until he has the actual key used to decrypt the file he has to endure the delay for every single key in the dictionary. |
JustinT wrote: | ||
Well, it isn't a paradox in the sense that it contradicts itself, be it logically or such. It is more so a paradox in that it contains a veracity of math in which there is a contradiction of how one's natural cognitive reaction may be to the problem. In other words, one may be apprehensive of the problem's validity in terms of how sound the conclusion is, therefore making this a "contrary to popular belief" case, rather than a "contradicting itself" case. Here's hoping that made sense. *pours you a drink* Cheers. |
Cyphoglyph wrote: |
What is so special of the 128 encryption if it is left by the wayside as the machines are compromised by browser hijackers, trojans, keyloggers, phishing, etc. It is equivalent to installing the best alarm on your front door while leaving the back door and the windows latched by a simple hasp. |
Cyphoglyph wrote: |
In the same spirit of front-door-only security, the best anti-virus apps AND the 128 encryption is trashed when a sharp coder creates a simple exploit that steals script-based pastings (check the Security in your Internet Options ) |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod, All times are GMT + 2 Hours