Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!nzpost1.xs4all.net!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.101 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.80; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:code': 0.07; 'subject:question': 0.08; 'cipher': 0.09; 'wed,': 0.15; 'alphabet': 0.16; 'lower,': 0.16; 'set,': 0.16; 'subject:Hiding': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; '2015': 0.20; 'cycles': 0.22; 'bit': 0.23; 'written': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; "doesn't": 0.26; '+0000': 0.27; 'least': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'character': 0.29; 'point': 0.33; 'options': 0.33; 'case,': 0.34; 'add': 0.34; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'set.': 0.35; 'unicode': 0.35; 'unknown': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'basic': 0.36; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'really': 0.37; 'method': 0.37; 'starting': 0.37; 'subject:from': 0.39; 'easily': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'where': 0.40; 'still': 0.40; 'entire': 0.61; 'matter': 0.63; 'more': 0.63; 'great': 0.63; 'within': 0.64; 'fall': 0.66; 'frequency': 0.66; '(utc),': 0.84; 'only...': 0.84; 'to:name:python': 0.84; 'dennis': 0.91; 'from.': 0.93 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=sKtFEixxENuWToUHYExmI0IlhgPDAZOUX9L3FrKoTrQ=; b=Et68Rr9LesNGhjdqrYmk+Ar0ih1WIl0Hvq5hGcXVpGYJlb+k+zcX9qDwg0sdS6ugFN PKfaoyXntIASP8DyKvfEolpRBfdsLSgOEpvrlGvDTQ6JjCDnFMFneDQEGkamc2n7XbJm yvrvg7lkCG9wpciD8K3qkZtRHnGCxMP4TxRF6amsKdpQd//aKZ+Jbx6cqUkpb/28UM8t HziHSF222OL5kSwsniEXAD4IId+Kwua/ugiJP0XJAkmcwVX2ytfAIrVW9RC/2eyyrj+U Ldx1iwS+vYzlIozAEYTxkkN89dDY+cGQ8YqOzfYt2Tf5Y7f8ynU7GbDiPlD7KauhbMN2 7xXA== X-Received: by 10.129.51.23 with SMTP id z23mr5470743ywz.198.1444315522719; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 07:45:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: Ian Kelly Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:44:43 -0600 Subject: Re: Hiding code from intruders, a different slant on an old question To: Python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 23 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1444315530 news.xs4all.nl 23823 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:46647 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:97508 On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 13:05:07 +0000 (UTC), alister > declaimed the following: > > >>With a simple Cesar the method is "shift the alphabet by 'X' characters >>and X is the key >> >>if the key is unknown then the attacker still has to brute force the >>method (admittedly with only 25 options this is not difficult) > > But who'd consider that with just one-case and alphabet only... > > At the least include upper, lower, numbers, and basic punctuation -- > that will add a few more cycles of computation time to break It doesn't really matter how much you add; any Caesar cipher is going to fall easily to just a little bit of frequency analysis. Consider an extreme case, where the range of X is the size of the entire Unicode character set. If the message is written in a Latin-based character set, chances are good that the majority of the characters will fall within a range of <96, giving the attacker a great starting point to brute-force from.