| bio | website | bradconte.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | Texas, USA | |
| age | 25 | |
| visits | member for | 1 year, 9 months |
| seen | yesterday | |
| stats | profile views | 18 |
I'm a software engineer. My specific interests are Cryptography and computer security. I graduated from UC Davis with B.S.s in C.S. and pure math.
My website: http://bradconte.com
|
Aug 14 |
answered | Homomorphic cryptosystems in RSA |
|
Aug 14 |
revised |
What is the actual difference between security through obscurity and true encryption? It was difficult to find appropriate tags, but at a minimum "keys" would seem to fit. |
|
Aug 14 |
reviewed | Looks Good Does the MixColumns step come before or after AddRoundKey in AES decryption? |
|
Aug 14 |
reviewed | Close Does the MixColumns step come before or after AddRoundKey in AES decryption? |
|
Aug 14 |
answered | What is the actual difference between security through obscurity and true encryption? |
|
Aug 13 |
revised |
PBKDF2 and salt added 2 characters in body; edited tags |
|
Aug 9 |
comment |
Do MD5's weaknesses affect Oplop? Do existing collision attacks on MD5 give any stepping stones for a pre-image attack? Given that the pre-image contains a master password, that could be a concern. |
|
Aug 6 |
revised |
Why x00 is usually avoided in salt? Added a tag that seemed appropriate. |
|
Aug 1 |
comment |
Does TLS use RC4-drop[n]? @D.W.: This is obviously not a duplicate of the question I linked to, but once you know the answer to that other question the answer to this one is a natural result. Since the RC4 weaknesses here are not relevant in the TLS context there is little motivation to use RC4-drop-n, and it isn't used. |
|
Aug 1 |
revised |
What are the dangers of predictable (repeated) plaintext structures? Added relevant tag. |
|
Jul 31 |
revised |
Relative security of a Vigenère cipher Added relevant tags. |
|
Jul 31 |
comment |
Does TLS use RC4-drop[n]? Very similar to this question. The summary is that these attacks do not really matter in the context of TLS/SSL (aka, when the key is randomized, there are no related keys, etc). Read RSA's own words here. |
|
Jul 31 |
revised |
Why x00 is usually avoided in salt? Clarified first paragraph. |
|
Jul 31 |
answered | Why x00 is usually avoided in salt? |
|
Jul 30 |
revised |
Why do we need extra hashing if we could use simpler scheme? Added "mac" tag. |
|
Jul 27 |
comment |
Is just a bit of random, “fully random”? If you view the separate hashes side-by-side they will only have 128 bits of entropy total because you need only discover 128 bits in order to learn their combined initial state. Taken individually, however, we would probably still think of each hash as the having 128 bits of entropy because that's the work factor for an attacker. No matter which string they choose they still have 128 bits of work to do. But since their entropy is not, shall we say, "distinct", you can't add the entropies when you combine the strings (so you don't get a paradox by copying and concatenating entropy). |
|
Jul 27 |
revised |
Is just a bit of random, “fully random”? Added another relevant tag. |
|
Jul 27 |
comment |
Should I use md5 for my new application? Is security now a component of the application? We need to understand where the lines in your application are being drawn between intended security and no intended security. |
|
Jul 27 |
answered | Is just a bit of random, “fully random”? |
|
Jul 24 |
answered | Is there a way to break this encryption? |