meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Saarbrücken, Germany | |
| age | 26 | |
| visits | member for | 1 year, 8 months |
| seen | 9 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 24 |
|
Jun 14 |
comment |
Is it possible to cryptographically prove when was the last time a ciphertext was decrypted/encrypted? That's really not the point. Even if the service provider does not know the key, they have no way to prove it. |
|
Jun 14 |
comment |
Is it possible to cryptographically prove when was the last time a ciphertext was decrypted/encrypted? @Michael That should be impossible. Basically you are trying to prove that you do NOT know something. Whatever protocol you use for that, you can always just pretend to not know. |
|
Jun 10 |
comment |
Is it possible to anonymize web traffic so that the IP Address cannot be determined while still being able to determine distinct IPs? Your proposed solution for 2. breaks 1. An attacker would simply run the IP-address through the function and invoke the "same_parent" functionality on the resulting string and an entry from the log... |
|
Jun 9 |
comment |
What kind of cryptography should i use? Well, if you do not trust S anyway, then encrypting in any way that enables S to decrypt seems a bit pointless. |
|
Jun 9 |
comment |
What kind of cryptography should i use? What is the reason that S cannot have a key-pair? |
|
Jun 8 |
revised |
Is symmetric key encrypted with server's public key secure edited tags |
|
Jun 7 |
reviewed | Leave Open Encrypt-then-MAC paradigm |
|
Jun 7 |
reviewed | Close How is text converted to a number for RSA? |
|
Jun 7 |
reviewed | Leave Open Why is RSA usually limited to messages up to 1 block |
|
Jun 7 |
awarded | Custodian |
|
Jun 7 |
reviewed | Leave Open If RSA is limited to 117-200 bytes or so, is that a very limited use case? |
|
Jun 7 |
reviewed | Leave Closed Will D-Wave's quantum computers ruin classical encryption? |
|
Jun 5 |
comment |
How can I split a message in parts of similar size or smaller? What are your security goals? From the description it seems like taking the 130-160 character message $m=m_1||m_2||m_3$ (with $m_x$ being between 43 and 53 characters) and splitting it into $m_1$,$m_2$, and $m_3$ would be a valid solution. As it apparently is not: What are your security goals? |
|
Jun 3 |
reviewed | Reviewed How insecure in practice? |
|
Jun 3 |
reviewed | Reviewed Can somebody explain the major contributions of the tenants of the Gödel Prize 2013? |
|
May 21 |
comment |
Do I need to keep a 64-bit version number secret? To answer that we would need to know what exactly your security goal is and what exactly the application is. For the confidentiality it shouldn't matter. But if your application needs some kind of unlinkability or something like that it could be a problem. We simply do not have enough information to judge the security of what you are trying to do. |
|
May 21 |
comment |
Do I need to keep a 64-bit version number secret? Well, if it does not pose a problem, then how can anything ever help. If there's no problem, then there is no need to solve anything. And no it would not help, because the information is still accessible to the hypothetical attacker. It is almost never valid to assume that the attacker does not know how your scheme works. |
|
May 21 |
comment |
Do I need to keep a 64-bit version number secret? The question is: Does exposing said information cause any security-loss in your application? If no, then there is no reason to try hiding it. If yes, then security by obscurity is definitely not the solution. |
|
May 20 |
reviewed | No Action Needed Is Base64(SHA1(GUID)) still unique like the original GUID? |
|
May 20 |
reviewed | No Action Needed Physical Level Encryption |
