# idea of new mode of operation might be secure [closed]

have a mode of operation that might increase security and make the ciphertext more random.

You can have the plaintext divided into blocks and have each block pass trough the initialization vector a new initialization vector is generated for each block each block will be XORed with the previous block before being encrypted

this mode has the features of ECB mode because it divides the plaintext into blocks and the features of CBC because an initialization vector is used on each block of plaintext and each block will be XORed with the previous block before being encrypted

you can call it electronic cipher block because the plaintext is divided into blocks and call it cipher block chaining because each block will go through an initalialization vector before being XORed with the previous block before being encrypted and can call it ECBC mode Electronic Code Block Chaining.

But will this new mode of operation idea be secure?

Mathematically, the idea looks like this:

Given, $P_1,P_2,P_3$ and $k_1,k_2,k_3$, generate $IV_1$ randomly, and compute $C_1=E_{k_1}(P_1 \oplus IV_1)$. Then set $IV_2=C_1$ and compute $C_2=E_{k_2}(P_2 \oplus IV_2)$, and set $IV_3=C_2$, and compute $C_3=E_{k_3}(P_3 \oplus IV_3)$.

-
this is just the previous question in a more clearer format – Andrew Jul 13 '12 at 23:00
in this mode the attacker will have to reconstruct the message – Andrew Jul 14 '12 at 0:52
It's not possible to decrypt that, since C1,C2,C3 will all equal IV. $\:$ – Ricky Demer Jul 14 '12 at 4:49
Or just write some code (pseudo or real, as long as its a normal looking language) – CodesInChaos Jul 14 '12 at 12:00
@mikeazo, Andrew: The formula given is not actually the same as CBC mode, as it uses a different key for each block (which is quite unusual for a block cipher mode of operation). – Paŭlo Ebermann Jul 15 '12 at 8:51

## closed as not constructive by David Schwartz, CodesInChaos, mikeazo♦Jul 14 '12 at 17:42

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.