Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.security.misc > #1136

Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly

Show all headers | View raw

Am 02.09.2015 um 18:24 schrieb William Unruh:
> On 2015-09-02, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>> [For completeness I send a copy nonetheless to this group]
>>
>>
>> In my code PROVABLEPRIME
>> (http://s13.zetaboards.com/Crypto/topic/7234475/1/) there is no seed
>> to be input by the user at all. When the Python session starts, the
>> system employs the current time to seed its built-in PRNG. So each
>> time one uses the code to e.g. generate RSA keys, one gets a different
>> pair by chance. Certainly one could question the security of that from
>
> No. It is known to be very insecure. You might get 10-20  bits of randomness
> that way but not more.

I have in comment lines in my code already indicated how one could use
Python's random.SystemRandom() instead of the normal random module.
I am now preparing an update that actually uses random.SystemRandom().

>> an "exact" standpoint (I mean in the sense of proofs of pure math),
>> but there is in "practical" crypto in general IMHO no way to take that
>> exact standpoint and yet have useful things done. Does e.g. AES have
>> an exact proof of its security? There is none, at least to my humble
>> knowledge.
>
> Rot 13 cannot be proven to be secure, AES 256 cannot be proven to be
> secure. Therefor Rot13 is as strong as AES 256. Can you see something
> wrong with that logic?

I am conscious that I could never exclude the possibility of having
security problems in my codes (seeing that even professional code
writers could make errors) and therefore I always ask for critiques
and comments.

I think it is interesting to report here that, after Kylheku has
set follow-ups to comp.programming, there were a few persons who
discussed there with me. The last post I wrote to Kylheku was
asking him to clearly resolve a paradox of mine (concerning AES in
CTR), which seems to indicate in my view some posssible problems
with security arguments based on entropy in general. I hope that he
would reply to that soon. Another person, Wessel, agreed with my
calculation of entropy in the paradox but asked about my intention
in that. I explained and it seems that he has no more questions.
A third person, bartekltg, wrote (especially in his more recent
posts) arguments that IMHO are quite strange. Since he continued
to claim that my calculation in the paradox is wrong, I asked him
in a last post to similarly refute Wessel and I'll delay further
discussions with him before seeing his post to Wessel. (He nonetheless
wrote a last post to me, which I didn't answer.)

M. K. Shen

Back to comp.security.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-01 13:09 +0200
  Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-09-01 14:23 +0000
    Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-01 20:00 +0200
      Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-09-01 18:43 +0000
        Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 10:56 +0200
          Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-09-02 16:24 +0000
            Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-03 05:58 +0200
              Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-04 18:34 +0200
                Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-09-04 18:32 +0000
                Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-05 20:50 +0200
                Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-28 11:30 +0200
                Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-10-08 18:28 +0200
  Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-09-01 13:23 -0700
    Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 11:04 +0200
  Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-02 02:22 -0500

csiph-web