4 ms·
Interesting that there are actually no encryption at all, just simple math equations.
by ex3ndr 11y ago
Interesting that there are actually no encryption at all, just simple math equations.
- chias 11y ago> just simple math equations To be fair, you could say the exact same thing about any modern encryption scheme.
- GavinMcG 11y ago"Simple" is... debatable. There's a good reason rolling your own is a bad idea.
- teambob 11y agoThe 'how' of encryption is often quite simple - it is 'why' that is difficult
- reitanqild 11y agoOr the other way around? Example: We all know why we should protect against timing attacks. How to get it right is the harder part.
- nl 11y agoNo. Encryption is designed to be irreversible without a specific piece of extra data. That isn't the same as not knowing the formula or initialization seeds used. Those are both reversible.
- colechristensen 11y agoI'm going to assume from the context is what they actually did was use a crypto-grade RNG to introduce bumps into the geoid surface. That is, instead of everything being 2 meters to the west (or whatever) things were randomly offset from their reported positions. You could "map" the whole thing or somehow steal the source and crypto parameters in order to transform between geoids, but you couldn't do something simple like subtraction.
- acqq 11y agoHowever it was obviously their goal not to have completely random oordinates but just "less precise."
- colechristensen 11y agoNot random ordinates, unpredictable offsets, apparently on the order of a kilometer. And it wasn't precision they were after at all. You could just make a global positioning system arbitrarily less precise but that isn't useful. Kilometer precision doesn't have much use to civilians, they need meter-precision at least and repeatable at that. What they were after was unpredictable but static accuracy offsets which presumably could be altered in a crisis.