Timeline for Is this method of encryption theoretically unbreakable?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2016 at 6:08 | comment | added | Fleeep | I would believe the shuffling will not work, because the previous key string does have a pattern, in terms that not all possible characters (e.g. all $2^8$ chars from ASCII) occur with the same frequency. So for the newly shuffled key, certain chars will be more likely to appear than others and therefor the new key string is not uniformly chosen anymore (what is a condition for a OTP). [Maybe continue in chat?] | |
| Mar 9, 2016 at 5:35 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | Fleeep: thanks. understood that my 'unbreakableness' correlates closely to how truly non-determinsitic the 'CSRNG' is. Should my current rnd vendor fail this test, I feel certain other qualified sources exist. Since the rnds are or will be 'truly' random, thus without pattern, could I then create a subsequent key for a subsequent encryption by REUSING the key but shuffling it. Unlike shuffling a key from English text (i.e. novel as key source), these rnds have no pattern, no ETAIONSHRDLU. Would that work? (Curious, not saving free rnds.) Thank you | |
| Mar 9, 2016 at 3:06 | comment | added | Fleeep | @JPresperEckert: So taken that your key is completely random and as long as your plaintext; than yes, your cipher should be unbreakable. If you get/download your key string from a website though, than your cipher is at most as strong as the cryptographic scheme used to secure your connection to the website. Remark to avoid confusion: The term "cryptographically secure" refers to a unpredictable sequence of bits w.r.t. some very small deviation (small enough to be secure for current tech. standards). True random bit sequences are (in some sense) "information-theoretical secure". | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 23:45 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | Thomas: I got the numbers from a site claiming them to be from 'atmospheric noise'. Even if they exaggerate, SOMEONE has collected enough random, crypto secure, data from physical events. Audio white noise amplitude delta, key stroke intervals, gamma ray hits, etc. So yes, no seed, truly random bits. Non-deterministic. | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 18:40 | comment | added | Thomas | @JPresperEckert Usually a CSPRNG means a deterministic algorithm that takes a small cryptographically secure seed as an input and returns a stream of pseudorandom bits. Are you saying your "CSPRNG" has no seed but returns truly random bits through atmospheric noise or whatever? | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 17:35 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | With what I've outlined, I assert I've met the zero info conveyance bar by reading some things, writing some simple code. Please help me understand what I'm missing. I find this subject very interesting, nothing more. Really eager to have an email exchange with you. I'm verbose or there's a lot to discuss. Love to chat further if you're open to that. Thanks for your time other way. Cheers, jpe | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 17:34 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | Thomas: It's the key length and CS rnds, not my great skill;. That's why I persist in asking about this. It looks to my untrained eye as if I've done all the things required to answer all the objections of crypto pros to using a true OTP, Vernam, stream cipher. It seems as if it should work against your unbounded computational power. No problem is intractable. OK. "&&&&". (as long as you like). What's the plaintext? What's the key? With access to neither, how can you infer anything about either? | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 17:33 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | Thomas: to continue. If the rnds are crypto secure then my plaintext 'a' can be encrypted to a ciphertext 'b', 'z', 'S', '$', etc. So this is the point where I struggle. Your domain expertise is manifest. But I don't see how, with what I've described, you can "infer ... many plaintext that can never encrypt to this cipher text". I respectfully suggest that ciphertext I generate can yield NO clue as to the corresponding plaintext. What Mr. Vernam created that I implemented with very straightforward file I/O and some VERY straightforward data manipulation. | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 17:23 | comment | added | J Presper Eckert | Thomas: thank you so much for your thoughtful answer. My CSPRNG data set of rnds comes from atmospheric noise -- nothing deterministic. Key length programmatically guaranteed to be as long as plaintext. Key file marked for decryption only after each encryption (no key reuse possible). There is virtually no overhead to encrypt/decrypt any message of any length, so there would be zero, rather than 'many' "key streams never generated". I can get 10^7 CS rnds a day for free. So key streams or plaintext size is not an issue. | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 7:09 | history | answered | Thomas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |