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

Re: Monetary Economics (fwd) [amusement]




Forwarded message:
> From [email protected] Sat Sep 13 07:01:15 1997
> To: [email protected]
> X-Original-Article-From: Scott Ellsworth <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Monetary Economics
> From: [email protected] (Leonard Erickson)
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 00:05:19 PST
> In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> Organization: Shadownet
> X-Newsreader: rnr v2.20
> Sender: [email protected]
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> 
> In mail you write:
> 
> > For this to work, the entity doing the credit management needs to have the
> > highest technology available, which I assume the Imperium has for a very
> > long time.  The techniques are likely known to those who want to find them
> > out, because someone would have defected.  Thus, you need a scheme that is
> > robust, even knowing the algorithm and some of the keys.
> 
> Old rule of cryptology. No code/cipher is secure unless it can provide
> protection against someone who knows the algorithm, but not the key.
> This is because it is *inevitable* that the algorithm will either leak,
> or worse, be guessed. 
> 
> If a key is known, that key is blown. But again, knowledge of one key
> should not compromise others. If it does, the code system is a piece of
> junk.
> 
> Theoretically, one time pads will *always* be secure. The only trouble
> is key distribution (well, key generation is tedious, but that's
> relatively minor).
> 
> Public key ciphers are subject to mathematical advances. Not
> *computational*, because if you have faster computers, then you can use
> bigger keys. But if someone comes up with a new mathematical technique
> that greatly decreases the work required to carry the mathematical
> operation that "secures" the cipher, then you are toast. For example, a
> whole bunch of public key schemes went down the tubes a few years back
> when somebody came up with a better solution to what's known as the
> "knapsack problem". The remaining schemes are based on the difficulty
> of factoring large numbers. So if a breakthrough is made in algorithms
> for factoring large numbers, they go away.
> 
> But for game purposes, we can assume that factoring is inherently hard
> (or that some new trick is found). So public key ciphers would be
> usable, though the keys may be a small book's worth of digits (stored
> in a tiny bit of storage). 
> 
> Given the fact of there being higher tech cultures, one time pads will
> be used for military and diplomatic stuff as well as anything that you
> are afraid might be trouble if someone with higher tech shows up.
> 
> But for generic business purposes, you just use the highest TL
> available for the public key ciphering gear. That way, it's unlikely
> that anybody can crack things soon. Sure, if a TL 16 race is found,
> they can crack your ciphers in weeks instead of years, but they aren't
> likely to *bother* with most commercial stuff.
> 
> -- 
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
>  [email protected]        <--preferred
> [email protected]     <--last resort
>