2 ms·
Huh? First off citing yourself isn't an elaboration. Second if you are arguing that one-time-pads don't work / won't work in modern times that goes against our
by urda 7y ago
Huh?
First off citing yourself isn't an elaboration. Second if you are arguing that one-time-pads don't work / won't work in modern times that goes against our entire understanding of certain bits of cryptography.
You'll need to yield some real sources first.
- mindslight 7y agoI referenced my own comment because I didn't feel like rephrasing what I had previously written, nor just spamming a copy of it. A logical argument doesn't rely on a "source": > A one-time pad XORed with a message doesn't provide integrity, and therefore can't reliably secure an arbitrary protocol The point is that sure, one time pads "work" the way they're described. But their properties don't actually fulfill what we require from modern cryptosystems. Note the sibling comments talking about augmenting them with half baked authentication schemes. Which are all into the realm of computational-complexity cryptography, and no longer "mathematically unbreakable!!1!"