[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cypherpunk Chip

On Aug 18, 11:36pm, [email protected] wrote:
> Subject: Cypherpunk Chip

[triple-DES | permute larger block | IDEA]
> Suppose you now change one bit in the ciphertext and decrypt it.
> When you decrypt IDEA, you get one 8-byte block of garbage (which
> is indistinguishable from the rest of the still-encrypted data).
> When you undo the reorganization, you get one bad byte in each DES
> block. So when you DES decrypt, you get 64 bytes of garbage.


For some time, I've been advocating (over in sci.crypt)


instead of normal triple DES.  tran is not an encryption algorithm so it's
been posted worldwide several times and is available from me by mail or on
a few ftp sites.  It does a pseudo-random transposition of a variable
length block (up to 8KB) -- using the sum of bytes in the first block as
the key to the PRNG.  [That could be better and I'm planning to do an
improvement -- using the histogram of the bytes of the first block as a
much larger key to the PRNG.]  tran is a self-inverse.

This dosen't guarantee bit diffusion -- but does diffuse the probability of
change (of a single output bit, given a changed single input bit) evenly
over a big block.

For operation within a single chip, I'd advocate yours rather than this

Of course, one could also do (for S/W solutions):


> Of course, it would be slower than a single cipher, but there are
> ways to make it usable. For example, the reorganization would be
> performed by straight-line assembly language, with no loops. And
> the encryption program would use a large disk buffer. Or, better
> yet, use hardware. See below.

There's no reason for pipelined operations like yours or mine to be slower
than a single cipher.  The pipelines need to be kept full.  That means
that you feed the chip data with one set of handshaking and take data from
it with another set.  You don't treat the chip like an RPC.  As long as
you think UNIX pipes, it will make sense.

 - Carl