Re: Hey old people

[Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com>]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Aviram Jenik wrote:

> On Sunday, 25 December 2005 21:04, Drsolly wrote:
> > > Can crypto weaknesses be considered 'vulnerabilities'? In most cases
> > > (e.g. cracking the Enigma code and deciphering the Zimmerman telegram)
> > > they are done by humintly retrieving the key or brute-forcing the cipher
> > > in one way or another.
>
> AFAIR breaking the Enigma consisted of:
> A. Getting the actual hardware (without which the allies were completely 
> clueless)

Actually, the Poles managed to crack Enigma before they got hold of the 
hardware.

> B. Performing a brute-force attack every morning to get that day's key

The whole point of Enigma (and devices like it) was that you couldn't 
brute-force it. Also, remember that at that time a "computer" was a person 
with a pencil and paper.
 
> I believe the weakness in the design Roland mentioned allowed the brute force 
> attack to succeed in a relatively short time - but it did not generate the 
> key right away (Roland - am I right?)

No.


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.