5 ms·
CRC was used to prevent misinterpretation of commands. Not authentication of commands. Cryptography would also need a CRC-type component (MAC code or AEAD ciphe
by yardstick 5y ago
CRC was used to prevent misinterpretation of commands. Not authentication of commands. Cryptography would also need a CRC-type component (MAC code or AEAD cipher used correctly).
- mistrial9 5y agoA signed and encrypted msg shows both author and that the content was not altered - How exactly is that not applicable?
- yardstick 5y agoThe op only mentioned cryptographic checks, not signed and encrypted. Even then, the signature and encryption algorithms used are important and you should still have a MAC to detect alteration of the cipher text. Hence my AEAD suggestion. Given the nature of the comms- to a device in the expanse of space- securing the transmission from malicious users seems like the last thing they should worry about. It’s more the accidental corruption of data, hence something like a CRC or simple MAC are sufficient for the circumstances. Why waste energy and CPU cycles on something you don’t actually need?
- eternityforest 5y agoThat's what I was referring to with cryptographic checks, MAC/AEAD/signatures/keyed hash/etc, or just a secure many-bits-long hash like sha2(Was that still secure at the time they built it?).