4 ms·
That sounds risky. You're using a cryptographic primitive in a non-standard way, and in danger of having created a weakness. For example, are you sure that you
by Strilanc 13y ago
That sounds risky. You're using a cryptographic primitive in a non-standard way, and in danger of having created a weakness.
For example, are you sure that your cipher doesn't have the property that for any text.Encrypt(key1).Encrypt(key2) there's an equivalent text.Encrypt(key3)? Some ciphers have that property (e.g. the one time pad). That would reduce your security from 10^N to... 10.
- im3w1l 13y agoThe article is about research on time lock systems, not about someone actually building one. Thus I think a speculative, "risky", novel idea is appropriate.