2 ms·
Thank you, that's my point exactly. Nothing wrong with what you wrote - but note the subtle difference between "XORing a stream of random numbers" (potentially
by Piskvorrr 9y ago
Thank you, that's my point exactly.
Nothing wrong with what you wrote - but note the subtle difference between "XORing a stream of random numbers" (potentially viable, even unbreakable when using a OTP) and "XORing a random number" (essentially a Caesar cipher, kid-sister encryption).
- thaumasiotes 9y ago> note the subtle difference between "XORing a stream of random numbers" (potentially viable, even unbreakable when using a OTP) and "XORing a random number" (essentially a Caesar cipher, kid-sister encryption) No, that's not a difference. A "stream of numbers" is just one very large number. What you're worrying about is how large the numbers are, not whether there's one or more than one.
- dfox 9y agoOriginal point was certainly to point out the most common mistake of typical homegrown cryptosystems. Even programmers who know that XORing stuff with constant byte is not viable encryption can produce systems that do essentially the same thing (usually by XORing everything with RC4 output with long lived or even constant key)