At 2:51 AM 8/1/95, Matt Blaze wrote:
Tim,
My impression (based on reviewing papers for the last few CRYPTOs and EUROCRYPTs) is that the reason for the lack of "practical" papers is primarily that not very many of them get submitted. In fact, I think
Right, but it's a kind of vicious circle. What I meant about cryptanalysis not really be "academic" is that not much status attaches to having broken a specific message.
there actually are a fair number of cryptanalysis papers at CRYPTO, at least compared with the even smaller number of papers there that describe new ciphers. Anyway, cryptanalysis IS part of the mainstream of the academic crypto world these days (consider differential cryptanalysis, linear cryptanalysis, etc.)
I guess this is my bias, as I think of the "differential cryptanalysis" as not really being cryptanalysis :-}. In the sense that it's basic research unto itself, not the grungy cracking of an actual cipher. But you're right that the stuff on Wiener's estimates for a DES-cracking machine, on the differential cryptanalysis work, etc., _does_ make it into Crypto. Ditto for breaking ciphers (showing them to be flawed). I just never see papers describing actual attacks on specific systems...maybe those who do such things are talking? I guess the bottom line of what I'm saying is that if some person or group wants to be a "tiger team" to try to find flaws in PGP, to try to break it, this would be a nifty thing. I doubt anyone on this list disagrees. --Tim May .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@sensemedia.net | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-728-0152 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Corralitos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."