New answers tagged

3

Can someone elaborate on why this is bad? Who said encoding salt before hashing was bad? When Tim McLean wrote: Be sure to pass in the raw bytes, and not, e.g., a hex-encoded string. he was specifically talking about generating a key for a symmetric cipher; he wasn't talking about generating an image to be hashed. When you generate a salt for a hash, ...


16

This does not talk about salt at all but about actual symmetric keys. Quoting the full paragraph: Most programming environments provide some sort of "secure random" mechanism (a CSPRNG). You can use this to acquire a byte array of the appropriate length (e.g. 32 bytes for AES256), which can be used as a key. Be sure to pass in the raw bytes, and ...


2

The challenging part is mostly about image processing, and not a lot about crypto. You want to extract from the image sufficient entropy in a reliable fashion. It has a lot to do with how you use the image and your adversary model. If your adversary knows nothing at all about the image, some simple coarse features could be sufficient, if your adversary knows ...


1

RSA doesn't take a password at all. The notation is simply incorrect. RSASSA-PSS takes a private key and a message and produces a signature. That signature can be verified by anyone with the signature, the message, and the public key. RSAES-OAEP takes a public key and a short message (almost always a symmetric key) and encrypts that message (symmetric key) ...


1

If you have $n_1$ copies of word $W_1$, $n_2$ copies of word $W_2$, and so on with $n_k$ copies of word $W_k$ and $n_1+n_2+\cdots+n_k=n,$ then there are exactly $$ \frac{n!}{n_1! n_2 ! \cdots n_k! } $$ orderings of these words. For you, $n=24,$ and say you had 2 words repeated three times $n_1=n_2=3,$ and the rest of the words were unique, thus $n_3=\cdots=...


Top 50 recent answers are included