in reply to Privacy without Encryption

Maybe I need to get into this a bit more, but well.. hence the comment. :)

Just a curiosity more than anything else... but when you mentioned multiple messages adding more and more chaff to help hide the 'real' messages, would there be any problems if two people choose the same key? Or if the random number generated == private key?

I suppose I should read up on this more, as once again, arhuman has written something that perks my interest in the world of crypto.

Anyway, nice node...

_14k4 - webmaster@poorheart.com (www.poorheart.com)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Privacy without Encryption
by arhuman (Vicar) on Jun 05, 2001 at 17:04 UTC
    You're totally right !
    If 2 people use the same key we could have a problem...

    But the probability to have 2 people using the same key at the same time on the same channel should be negligeable...
    (furthermore my with my implementation this would be detected by a decompression error)
    In the same way the probability to generate a random packet with a valid checksum exists but is so low, that it could be ignored
    (However a robust implementation could test it easily at packet generation time...)


    "Only Bad Coders Code Badly In Perl" (OBC2BIP)
[reply]

In Section Meditations