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

Re: Cryptanalysis

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Cryptanalysis
From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 19:58 EDT
Cc: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

From:	IN%"[email protected]"  9-MAR-1996 12:05:04.70

>There are very good reasons to say little about "conventional
>cryptanalysis": it just doesn't matter much with modern ciphers, such as
>public key systems. Modern ciphers don't fall to conventional attacks based
>on word frequency, pattern analysis, etc.

	I realize that this may also be considered an out of date subject,
but what's a good reference for codes as opposed to cyphers (other than
the one reference in the Cyphernomicon which includes "codes" in its title)?
	Thanks,
	-Allen

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cryptanalysis
  - From: Mike Tighe <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: SurfWatch
Next by Date: Re: U.S. State Dept criticizes Chinese net-censorship
Prev by thread: Re: Cryptanalysis
Next by thread: Re: Cryptanalysis
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread