Article View: sci.crypt
Article #4129Re: Unix Password Hacker
From: Jeff Siegal
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1988 01:05
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1988 01:05
21 lines
1473 bytes
1473 bytes
In article <QWB54=y00Xo9Q3A1c3@andrew.cmu.edu> jk3k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joe Keane) writes: > >In article <1988Mar2.235819.18983@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry >Spencer) writes: >> [...]. If they are of the same order of magnitude, >> then E1+E2 does approximate 2*max(E1, E2) and abandoning one of them does >> reduce security significantly. >A factor of two is `significant'? So if we add one bit to DES (don't ask how) >it will be `significantly' more secure? I disagree. By your logic, we could remove bits as well, without `significantly' [sic] reducing security--one-at-a-time, all the way down to one bit, or even none. Reasonably secure systems rely on layers of difficult-to-bypass barriers (e.g. fence, man-eating-dogs, armed guards, locks on building doors, building alarm system, video cameras, motion detectors, locks on computer room door(s), etc.) rather than one "impenetrable" maginot line. Jeff Siegal
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8469@eddie.MIT.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!fenchurch.mit.edu!jbsReferences:
<731@ddsw1.UUCP> <657@morningdew.BBN.COM> <1988Mar2.235819.18983@utzoo.uucp> <QWB54=y00Xo9Q3A1c3@andrew.cmu.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!fenchurch.mit.edu!jbs From: jbs@fenchurch.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal) Newsgroups: sci.crypt Subject: Re: Unix Password Hacker Message-ID: <8469@eddie.MIT.EDU> Date: 14 Mar 88 01:05:39 GMT References: <731@ddsw1.UUCP> <657@morningdew.BBN.COM> <1988Mar2.235819.18983@utzoo.uucp> <QWB54=y00Xo9Q3A1c3@andrew.cmu.edu> Sender: uucp@eddie.MIT.EDU Reply-To: jbs@fenchurch.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal) Organization: MIT EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA Lines: 21