Re: [Full-Disclosure] Time Expiry Alogorithm??

["Pavel Kankovsky" <peak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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
cryptography.

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.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html