Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
On 2/13/2024 8:45 PM, Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
As Jacob correctly pointed out, if one knows the message, one can
then 'hand craft' a one-time-pad to generate exactly this output
from that message.
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/13/2024 8:45 PM, Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
As Jacob correctly pointed out, if one knows the message, one can
then 'hand craft' a one-time-pad to generate exactly this output
from that message.
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this?
I mean the OP IMHO does not show an encrypted string, done with an
OTP.
OTPs nature is that it does not include patterns and is totally
random.
Even if this string is not encrypted and only encoded, how would one
get such pattern from plain text and convert it back to plain text?
It had been best if the OP had posted a reference URL ...
In sci.crypt Stefan Claas <pollux@tilde.club> wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this?
For a traditional, 1940's substution style OTP, it is trivial:
Message: The
Pad:
T=H
e=r
h=e
Substitute using the pad, get the encrypted message: Her
It had been best if the OP had posted a reference URL ...
I doubt OP found the string at some URL. I suspect the OP was
trolling.
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/15/2024 12:20 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Stefan Claas <pollux@tilde.club> wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this?
For a traditional, 1940's substution style OTP, it is trivial:
Message: The
Pad:
T=H
e=r
h=e
Substitute using the pad, get the encrypted message: Her
Well, one uses a substitution table, trigraph, etc. and then
a pad to encrypt the message. Otherwise it would be a plain
text encoded message, right?
Give me a OPT 3 bytes long. Creating a plaintext that results in a ciphertext of say 123, or ABC is possible...
Yes, but then it is not OTP encryption and only plain code, done
with substitution, I would say. The OP's Subject: is Patterns.
On 2/15/2024 12:20 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Stefan Claas <pollux@tilde.club> wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this?
For a traditional, 1940's substution style OTP, it is trivial:
Message: The
Pad:
T=H
e=r
h=e
Substitute using the pad, get the encrypted message: Her
Well, one uses a substitution table, trigraph, etc. and then
a pad to encrypt the message. Otherwise it would be a plain
text encoded message, right?
Give me a OPT 3 bytes long. Creating a plaintext that results in a
ciphertext of say 123, or ABC is possible...
On 2/16/2024 9:07 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/15/2024 12:20 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Stefan Claas <pollux@tilde.club> wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or >>>>>>>> Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this >>>>>>>> output for fun.
How would you do this?
For a traditional, 1940's substution style OTP, it is trivial:
Message: The
Pad:
T=H
e=r
h=e
Substitute using the pad, get the encrypted message: Her
Well, one uses a substitution table, trigraph, etc. and then
a pad to encrypt the message. Otherwise it would be a plain
text encoded message, right?
Give me a OPT 3 bytes long. Creating a plaintext that results in a
ciphertext of say 123, or ABC is possible...
Yes, but then it is not OTP encryption and only plain code, done
with substitution, I would say. The OP's Subject: is Patterns.
To be more clear, an OTP encrypted message with digits or letters
can of course include 3-5 letter words or a 3-5 digits sequence, but
in case of OTPs this means nothing and I would not call it pattern,
in an encrypted message.
AFAICT, it all boils down to fun with OTP's... ;^)
A One Time Pad means what it says. It can only be used once. It must be
the same size as the message to be encrypted (ie you cannot use pad from earlier in the message to encode later stuff.) Otherwise it is weak. It
is not a substition cypher (eg your T=H e=r h=e ) to encrypt any other occrances of T, h or e. That is NOT an OTP. It is a MRP (Many time pad)
which is woefully weak. A OTP is unconditionally secret. It cannot be
broken. An MTP is very weak, or a substitiution cypher is very weak
unless the substition block is really large.
OTPs are not fun. They are boring, because there is no way they can be broken, unless you capture the key. But of course that is their problem
since you have to get the key to the recipient, without the enemy
capturing the key, and the key is huge, so hard to hide.
In sci.crypt William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
A One Time Pad means what it says. It can only be used once. It must be
the same size as the message to be encrypted (ie you cannot use pad from
earlier in the message to encode later stuff.) Otherwise it is weak. It
is not a substition cypher (eg your T=H e=r h=e ) to encrypt any other
occrances of T, h or e. That is NOT an OTP. It is a MRP (Many time pad)
which is woefully weak. A OTP is unconditionally secret. It cannot be
broken. An MTP is very weak, or a substitiution cypher is very weak
unless the substition block is really large.
OTPs are not fun. They are boring, because there is no way they can be
broken, unless you capture the key. But of course that is their problem
since you have to get the key to the recipient, without the enemy
capturing the key, and the key is huge, so hard to hide.
All correct, and also Whoosh!...
The OP (the Doctor, likely trolling as he has not again been seen in
this thread) posted a string of sequential letters and numbers and
asked what "encryption" was used.
Jacob, in message <uqg2om$252r4$1@dont-email.me> correctly pointed out
that /assuming/ it even was an "encrypted" output, that one way to have created the sequential string as the "cipher text" was to specially
craft an OTP "pad" for a known message to result in the given output.
Stefan, in message <uqln3h$2pbms$1@i2pn2.org> asked how this could be
done. My reply with the T=H substitution was an extremely simplified explanation of how one could craft a pad to cause a given output to
appear.
On 2/15/2024 11:02 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/13/2024 8:45 PM, Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
As Jacob correctly pointed out, if one knows the message, one can
then 'hand craft' a one-time-pad to generate exactly this output
from that message.
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this? I mean the OP IMHO does not show an encrypted
string, done with an OTP. OTPs nature is that it does not include
patterns and is totally random.
If Bob and Alice have access to the same OPT, one of them can create a special plaintext that can give the message in the ciphertext, or
whatever... Think about it... ;^)
On 20/02/2024 21:09, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/15/2024 11:02 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/13/2024 8:45 PM, Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
As Jacob correctly pointed out, if one knows the message, one can
then 'hand craft' a one-time-pad to generate exactly this output
from that message.
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this? I mean the OP IMHO does not show an encrypted
string, done with an OTP. OTPs nature is that it does not include
patterns and is totally random.
If Bob and Alice have access to the same OPT, one of them can create a
special plaintext that can give the message in the ciphertext, or
whatever... Think about it... ;^)
If the ciphertext is just going to be 123...abc..., then there is no
point in transmitting it.
On 2/15/2024 11:02 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 2/13/2024 8:45 PM, Rich wrote:
In sci.crypt Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 2/12/2024 5:30 PM, The Doctor wrote:
Deos anyone how what encryption is being used here?
*1234567890ABCDEF01234567890ABCDEF0123456
None? lol. just kidding. Humm...
Some combination of plaintext, secret key and cipher algorithm
generated it. Probably, the plaintext was hand crafted? ;^)
As Jacob correctly pointed out, if one knows the message, one can
then 'hand craft' a one-time-pad to generate exactly this output
from that message.
Or even the other way around? If one knows the OTP (Bob and/or
Alice), they can create a special plaintext that generates this
output for fun.
How would you do this? I mean the OP IMHO does not show an encrypted
string, done with an OTP. OTPs nature is that it does not include
patterns and is totally random.
If Bob and Alice have access to the same OPT, one of them can create a special plaintext that can give the message in the ciphertext, or
whatever... Think about it... ;^)
Even if this string is not encrypted and only encoded, how would one
get such pattern from plain text and convert it back to plain text?
It had been best if the OP had posted a reference URL ...
Regards
Stefan
If Bob and Alice have access to the same OPT, one of them can create
a special plaintext that can give the message in the ciphertext, or whatever... Think about it... ;^)
On 2/21/2024 10:24 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
If Bob and Alice have access to the same OPT, one of them can
create a special plaintext that can give the message in the
ciphertext, or whatever... Think about it... ;^)
Can you craft an example, maybe with code (that compiles ...)?
BTW. I would appreciate if you and other sci.crypt regulars
can sign my guestbook, on my Gemini-Capsule.
gemini://tilde.club/~pollux/
The guestbook is under Gästebuch.
I am thinking about to set-up a cryptobook for us in Geminispace,
so that small encrypted messages can be left there ... ;-)
http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=9c113c0799ac3d9b52edbf3429aa673022d46643c5689d93f7cc16688e99961c249bb349a7c6a1c9603ddc793f613cb08a32d3c8284f6dd1a0e9fe3d2cbaf4b32d9717a7be19a1b4934a1e5c5b653ce9213e2acf0cd24a9af41789f9c0bba9fbe2f835a31fe35d90b95514f4d3ad1261e8fc3de2268fec68037bce2dc315ed0
Gemini is an Internet Protocol, starting with gemini:// and a mixture
of gopher and classic html.
On 2/23/2024 10:59 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:19d672f834593b161ffb1338f77bd51aa5328ab1854b531f33d415ac79ddb154a85beacb0a155cb64b47e551cadf2ad22ad689920bcdc670d1283d337413b691cd1294db0a7ae44bf6e5a9aa3adc138d4a7e2807c48c6612b1674b3caba2257776bfad003601cc973d6d95e2bab113cd7f70be4e8309c8a34a8c2aab53d5115
Stefan Claas wrote:
Gemini is an Internet Protocol, starting with gemini:// and a
mixture of gopher and classic html.
https://github.com/kr1sp1n/awesome-gemini
http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=
A little busy right now.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 63:55:34 |
| Calls: | 6,690 |
| Files: | 12,226 |
| Messages: | 5,345,650 |