The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroups
These Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To These Or Any Other
Newsgroups. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroups And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Hubert von Jättekivastjärna Sr."
References: <email@example.com> <3F4C55C1.114C@despam.autobahn.mb.ca>
Subject: Re: the FBI and 1 time pads
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:05:25 +0300
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:02:32 EEST
Organization: Saunalahti Customer
"H. E. Taylor" wrote
> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> PCportinc wrote:
> > I watched that PBS special on the Atom Bomb spies.
> > They talked about one time pads used by the Soviets
> > and said that even today's super computers cannot
> > break the pad. is this true? if so, then even such simple
> > methods as were used 50 years ago could still be used
> > today and not even the NSA or the FBI would be able
> > to figure out what the encrypted message is?
> > every word had a number, then some random numbers were
> > added to them, then something else was done. I guess unless
> > you had access to the pad you cant decode the message.
> > if so, why the need for RSA, Blowfish, 128-bit, PGP, TEA, etc.?
> > The bad old Ruskies didnt use them, neither did the Germans in
> > WWII, and if it wasnt for human error, their encrypted messages
> > would not have been decoded.
> This question would be more likely to get a useful answer
> in . One problem with one time pads is
> that sender and receiver must both have the same list
> of 'random numbers'.
> Added s.c
> "Bring me a one-handed economist." -Harry Truman
> Iraq War News: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/terror_war/iraqw.html
> H.E. Taylor http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/
I - an anonymous amateur - have learned that it's forever true that OTP (One
Time Pad) is safe. In principle. No computer will ever change that. In
Wow! Isn't it nice to sometimes _feel_ really _safe_ in this world of
There is a couple of catches though. Delivery of the keys is a big problem,
because you must _never_ use a key again and the key must always be at least
as long as the message. Quality of the keys may also a problem - they must
be _truly_ random. You've heard of nice programs which produce "random"
numbers? Randomness is a lot more difficult subject than one might think.
OTPs are not a very popular subject in sci.crypt. The problems involved are
quite big. In general OTPs are not very practical.
And now take that silly smile off your face and return back to the unsecure
Real World ;-)
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The alt.politics.org.fbi Newsgroup