[cryptography] Well, that's depressing. Now what?

Warren Kumari warren at kumari.net
Sat Jan 28 11:13:51 EST 2012


On Jan 27, 2012, at 8:22 PM, Noon Silk wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Steven Bellovin <smb at cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Or at least that's what everyone thought. More recently, various groups have begun to focus on
>>> a fly in the ointment: the practical implementation of this process. While quantum key distribution
>>> offers perfect security in practice, the devices used to send quantum messages are inevitably
>>> imperfect.
>> 
>> This is only surprising if you assume large values of "everyone".  Anyone in the real world has
>> long since worried about implementations.  Remember Bob Morris' Rule 1 of cryptanalysis: check
>> for plaintext.  (http://www.ieee-security.org/Cipher/ConfReports/conf-rep-Crypto95.html)
> 
> So why didn't one of these "real world" people point this out, to
> researchers? It's a bit too easy to claim something as obvious when
> someone just told you.
> 

Fine. Good point.

For future reference (just so the researchers are aware, you understand):
Quantum foo does not protect against:
Stealing interesting things before they reach the encryption bit.
Employees who copy the plain text onto USB drives and take them home.
Male-pattern baldness.
Impotence.
People who talk in their sleep.
Having a tree land on your car.
Measles.
A feeling of angst.
Unicorns.
<anything else that it outside of the accepted claims of what it is supposed to protect against>.

Do I win a lollipop now?
W


> 
>>                --Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
> 
> -- 
> Noon Silk
> 
> Fancy a quantum lunch? https://sites.google.com/site/quantumlunch/
> 
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
> of being this signature."
> _______________________________________________
> cryptography mailing list
> cryptography at randombit.net
> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
> 

--
Don't be impressed with unintelligible stuff said condescendingly.
    -- Radia Perlman.








More information about the cryptography mailing list