mailing list archives
Re: Time Expiry Alogorithm??
From: "Pavel Kankovsky" <peak () argo troja mff cuni cz>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:30:57 +0100 (CET)
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Georgi Guninski wrote:
would prefer to keep my secrets encrypted with algorithm whose breaking
requires *provable* average runtime x^4242 or even x^42 instead of
*suspected runtime* 2^(x/4). (due to lameness the previous statement may be
incorrect but hope the idea is clear). afaik crypto algorithms don't exists
with provable average breaking time in suitable P.
Provable complexity is a rather scarce commodity in the area of
Yes, there are tons of proofs out there but most of them are based on
*unproven* conjectures about the complexity of certain basic problems
(RSA problem, discrete logarithm etc.), therefore the best thing we get is
provable *relative* complexity.
Most of the cryptography is black magic (I wouldn't say that if I
haven't heard similar claims from true cryptologists...<g>).
Of course, you can always use the Vernam cipher when you need something
provably secure. :)
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Re: Time Expiry Alogorithm?? Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 19)
Re: Time Expiry Alogorithm?? Gary E. Miller (Nov 20)