Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: Secure Science issues preview of their upcoming block cipher |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:02:06 -0500 (EST) |
[The From: header is a broken-autoresponder defense; use the address in the signature if you want to write to me.] [quoting order repaired manually -dM]
[...] CS2-128 cipher is a 128-bit block cipher with a 128 bit key. This cipher is [...] provably just as secure as AES-128.Really? How does one go about proving the security of a block cipher?
Proving it just as secure as another cipher is very different from
proving its security in any kind of absolute sense.
If I wanted to prove two ciphers to be of equivalent security ("just as
secure as"), I would try to find a way to use a break of either to
break the other (with sufficiently trivial transformation cost, of
course). If I show that any break of CS2-128 can be trivially used to
break AES-128, then I have shown that CS2-128 is at least as secure
than AES-128; if I do the same in the other direction too, I have shown
that it is just as secure.
My understanding is that you, and others, perform attacks against it, and see how it holds up.
That is how to probe its security in absolute terms; it cannot prove anything in the mathematical sense that is apparently being used here. (Well, okay, it _can_ prove that a cipher is *in*secure.) "Provably just as secure as" has little to nothing to do with the kind of demonstration of security derived from withstanding skilled attacks. /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Security Flaw with Digital signatures in Microsoft Outlook, Anthony G. Atkielski |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: smail remote and local root holes (no, not really ;-), Greg A. Woods |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Secure Science issues preview of their upcoming block cipher, David Covin |
| Next by Thread: | LogicLibrary BugScan VSR,Trillian 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1, Matt Hargett |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |