home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!samsung!transfer!ellisun.sw.stratus.com!cme
- From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Subject: Re: transposition ciphers
- Message-ID: <5141@transfer.stratus.com>
- Date: 27 Jul 92 15:21:26 GMT
- References: <92207.142318U27239@uicvm.uic.edu>
- Sender: usenet@transfer.stratus.com
- Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <92207.142318U27239@uicvm.uic.edu> U27239@uicvm.uic.edu (Gerald Strom) writes:
- >This Caesar Cipher is not secure by the standards of today but
- >interestingly, the method used, substituting one letter or character for
- >another in a regular way, is still the fundamental basis for encipherment
- >in modern ciphers systems. The DES system developed by the United States
- >government, the various public key ciphers systems, as well as the German
- >Enigma cipher cracked by Allen Turing during World War II using one of the
- >first computers are all substitution ciphers whereby letters in the plain
- >(or un-enciphered) text are replaced by different letters or characters to
- >create the cipher (or enciphered) text.
-
- This is an inaccurate statement. It gives the impression that all these
- systems operate on individual characters and are as insecure as Caesar.
-
- A transposition over, say, 25-byte blocks is a substitution just as DES is
- a substitution over 8-byte blocks -- only the transposition is simpler.
-
- A one time pad is a substitution cipher -- and about as secure as you can
- get.
-
- A self-inverse transposition was posted here a month or two ago --
- operating over large blocks (up to 8K). With FFT techniques, we can build
- a much larger block DES -- eg., operating on 8K blocks. I would prefer
- the large DES over a large transposition.
-