|
-
July 24th, 2007, 03:43 AM
#10
 Originally Posted by sec_ware
Hi
Substitution ciphers _can_ be extremely secure. Actually, the only known
class of unbreakable ciphers is often categorised as a subsitution ciphers:
the one-time pad (or see also polyalphabetic substitutions).
The drawback certainly is that the key has to be quite long, has to be perfectly
random, and the pad should not be got lost 
Why would they need to be perfectly random? If you used something like a book for a key, how would that be worse than using the same length string of random characters? The chance of someone guessing that you used that book as a key would be fairly slim, so i wouldn't even consider that as a factor in the security, unless it was an extremely common book that has something to do with the contents or something in that nature. And even if they did guess it, they'd still need the exact same document, with all the same spaces and everything.
Similar Threads
-
By Euclid in forum Tech Humor
Replies: 0
Last Post: September 2nd, 2002, 07:04 PM
-
By smirc in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 6
Last Post: May 13th, 2002, 04:35 PM
-
By smirc in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 3
Last Post: May 13th, 2002, 03:24 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|