Re: [Sci.nanotech] Encrypting Nanotechnology


In article <12l7pgftg9ffkea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Perry E. Metzger
<URL:mailto:perry@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Rory McLean <rory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Rory McLean <rory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
[snip]

I was speculating whether the security mechanism could be
something like the Enigma Machine (see Wikipedia; you could
easily have more than three rotors),

If you're desire is to have your encryption system broken immediately,
choosing the state of the art from 1935 is perhaps a reasonable
choice. If what you're trying to do is actually protect communications
links, the issue is well understood already. Cryptography is a big
area of study, and there are lots of good modern books that can
provide you with an introduction to the field, not to mention a lot of
research and discovery that has happened in the last 60 years or so.

With some simple modifications it is possible to take something
very similar to the rotor system of the Enigma Machine and
create an apparently continuous stream of white noise with
apparently random fluctuations.

I'd suggest not discussing a topic you don't understand. I named
several books you could read to correct your lack of understanding in
my previous posting. If you have trouble paying for them you can take
them out at a local library. Ignorance is easily corrected with
education.

I certainly don't claim to be a complete expert on the subject,
but I've taken a little interest in it for a few years. I'm
sure that there are further things to learn.


When I taught a university class in the topic, I used to use
Schneier's "Applied Cryptography" and "Handbook of Applied
Cryptography" by Menezes, Oorschot, and Vanstone as the primary
texts. Those books are now somewhat obsolete -- they don't cover
topics like AES and they were all written long before MD5 got broken
and such. None the less, you could start learning there.

I would agree with you that Schneier has some interesting things
to say,

Then perhaps you should read his books at least once. I'll be blunt --
your posting made it very clear that you haven't ever cracked either
of his texts on this topic, or any other for that matter.

Yes, Schneier does say interesting things, and I've read quite a
bit of his writings. He makes a lot of sense, but I don't
necessarily agree with everything he says; I suspect that both
of us find that with many subjects.

Careful use of simple mechanisms that are well understood can
often produce useful results - to use a (crude) analogy, people
still construct stone buildings even though far more advanced
construction methods are known, and you can use modern methods
to make them comfortable and pleasant places to live in, or: we
still use crowbars, and the lever was probably one of the first
tools discovered.

I suspect that this is an area where there will be a lot of
disagreement, and that some form of practical demonstration,
which can relatively easily be done on the macro scale, will be
required.

I in no way guarantee the systems that I have sketched will
work, there is always the possibility that something has been
overlooked, but from what I have seen so far, of it and similar
systems over the last 15+ years, I feel it is worth further
investigation.

If nothing else a simple fast form of stream encryption of some
sort will likely be needed, that can be incorporated into
nanotech with minimal overhead, and that was just one
possibility, which has some attractive characteristics.


Perry

[And your humble moderator will bluntly suggest we maintain a civil tone
in the future, thank you. --JSN]

--
Rory McLean
rory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


.