| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Cryptography Forum » ciphers
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Shawn Augustson |
 Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 11:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
---SOM #1---
@^212bak211y/cp1/13veu121s/gz2122fSz3%2/13pi/e313/mkj311jmo/2113guC4/314go/t12/1dqy12/2as/d122xui/1@#12u/wn31/3rys2/11oa/x1234Hwf/532^3leh312igm/322f@ir1135iYi6/213ckw31/3zm/b311wog21/16j#aL721/2tql%/313qsq313nu/v212kwa223h/yf23/2eak%211bcp/311ye/u122vgz2/237Kc#o8/123sie313p/kj2/33%m/mo212/8lEr9323j#o/t113gqy2129mgU/0121ds/d233aui213xw/n232uys/313r%ax12/3oeh2130@Nix/1113@^lgm323i/ir122f/kw113^1oKa
31/1cm^b122z/og1132p/mD331@^2wql212^
---EOM #1---
---SOM #2---
#b/ot323eqy3/1%2hsd22/1kui11/37eP@j83/12n%wn3/31qy#s312/tax2^12wcc12/1#@zeh212c/gm11@3fir/1228%hrN91^21ikw211l/^mb212
---EOM #2---
---SOM #3--
@rak312/0sC#n1112oc%p31/2leu32/3igz3231te%R/2122fi/e31^4ckj113/zmo1/21wot3222Ugt3@3/11tqy233/qsd212nui312^kwn323/3vIw431/24wk/Z52^32hys211e/ax113b@c/c121yeh%3/225Xmc611/2vgm/31^2sir212pkw223/6yOe7113%#mm/b231jog/113gql2/11dsq2#137zq/H8112^auv3/13xwa211/uyf12^38A#sj93/129b#Um0/12^2rak/121o/cp213#
---EOM #3--- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John A. Malley |
| Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 12:12 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Peschel |
| Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 2:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"John A. Malley" <102667.2235@compuserve.com> wrote in
news:400D6161.2020808@compuserve.com:
It appears that Michael is not going to include ciphertext-only challenges
in the Sandbox, since he has eliminated from his site the cipher solved by
Amling.
J
--
__________________________________________
When will Bush come to his senses?
Joe Peschel
D.O.E. SysWorks
http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm
__________________________________________ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Michael Brown |
| Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 7:58 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Joe Peschel wrote:
Quote: "John A. Malley" <102667.2235@compuserve.com> wrote in
news:400D6161.2020808@compuserve.com:
I'll see your ciphers, and raise you the Sandbox:
See http://sandbox.emboss.co.nz/
It appears that Michael is not going to include ciphertext-only
challenges in the Sandbox, since he has eliminated from his site the
cipher solved by Amling.
php bug, now fixed. Adding this set of plaintexts now.
--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more 
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Peschel |
| Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 12:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Michael Brown" <see@signature.below> wrote in
news:37kPb.18693$9k7.331911@news.xtra.co.nz:
Quote: Joe Peschel wrote:
It appears that Michael is not going to include ciphertext-only
challenges in the Sandbox, since he has eliminated from his site the
cipher solved by Amling.
php bug, now fixed. Adding this set of plaintexts now.
I see. If I were you I would award zero points to these ciphertext-only
challenges, and instead give points, if any at all, to the folks who crack
the messages. This way you might discourage ciphertext-only challenges in
sci.crypt, which I thought was the point of the Sandbox. I'd also add the
ciphertext-only challenges to the Sandbox as soon as they appear in
sci.crypt. Do you want help finding the older, unsolved challenges?
J
--
__________________________________________
When will Bush come to his senses?
Joe Peschel
D.O.E. SysWorks
http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm
__________________________________________ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Michael Brown |
| Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 3:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Joe Peschel wrote:
Quote: "Michael Brown" <see@signature.below> wrote in
news:37kPb.18693$9k7.331911@news.xtra.co.nz:
Joe Peschel wrote:
It appears that Michael is not going to include ciphertext-only
challenges in the Sandbox, since he has eliminated from his site the
cipher solved by Amling.
php bug, now fixed. Adding this set of plaintexts now.
I see. If I were you I would award zero points to these
ciphertext-only challenges, and instead give points, if any at all,
to the folks who crack the messages. This way you might discourage
ciphertext-only challenges in sci.crypt, which I thought was the
point of the Sandbox.
Yes, I've been thinking about this too IIRC, one of my original ideas was
to have two scores: one for the cipher and one for what people got if they
broke it. However, I've hatched a semi-cunning plan: a cipher-text only
challenge gets a baseline score (Sp * (1-M*Sb) * Sc) of 0.005, which serves
to get it above zero so that people can see which ones would be most
profitable to attack, while keeping it much below any reasonable cipher.
However, if someone discovers how to break one of these challenges, they
will almost certainly have to figure out the algorithm behind it. At which
point the cipher now has a public algorithm, along with a proper baseline
score. This new baseline score is what will be used to calculate the points
given to the attacker, and the attacker will almost certainly get 100% of
the points that the cipher has.
Suggestions, as usual, are welcome :)
Quote: I'd also add the ciphertext-only challenges to
the Sandbox as soon as they appear in sci.crypt.
I'll try to do this (though can't gaurantee 24/7 monitoring of sci.crypt
), and this should work better once I get automatic submission working.
Quote: Do you want help
finding the older, unsolved challenges?
That would be much appreciated. Actually, even solved challenges would be
good too if they showed some interesting way of attacking the cipher.
--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Peschel |
| Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 6:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Michael Brown" <see@signature.below> wrote in
news:f4rPb.19057$9k7.336913@news.xtra.co.nz:
Quote: That would be much appreciated. Actually, even solved challenges would be
good too if they showed some interesting way of attacking the cipher.
How about Gillogly's solution to LinuxGuy's "Please test this encryption"
challenge? Kevin Buhr independently cracked it shortly after Jim did.
J
--
__________________________________________
When will Bush come to his senses?
Joe Peschel
D.O.E. SysWorks
http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm
__________________________________________ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| JT |
| Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I think we need a more sophisticated mind to explore the ciphers at
sanbox.
Sorry Michael i do not mean to suggest you are dent 
But what part of the cipher is it that you have trouble to understand?
I do not want to be picky about the scoring system but i do beleive my
cipher, should have some scores and merits.
It is one of the most straightforward cipher ever written.
Just shuffles and xors, maybe that is what so disturbing? So painful
simple but yet the diffusion "just perfect"?
If there anyway my cipher could get any rating at all, it would be fun
to know .
I can tell you some of the props my cipher have that other ciphers
missing.
+A very slim and easy to implement streamcipher that runs in CTR mode,
with a nice message authentication system built in with the algo.
(Need 4096+2048 bytes of memory to hold the subkeys+internal state).
+It is a purebreed nonelinear [shuffles2xor] cipher no need for any
obscure sbox with hidden convolutions props.
+Totally scaleable key from 1 byte to 256 bytes aka 2048 bits right
out of the box without modification.(Could be modified to work witha
ANY! keysize.
+A very nice kongruential keyexpansion scheme that makes just to much
buzz to make keylookup tables out of sight.
+A beautiful set of two 256 bytessubkeys generated from a none linear
shuffle algo. The algo itself is none reversible so it is impossible
to traceback the subkeys to the orginal key.
+Streambuddy is a perfect secret algorithm where each round have *full
diffusion* taking shannons theories to new hights.
+Two none reversible shuffles[subkeys] creates the first [perfect
diffusion layer] that has perfect secrecy between each block round in
itself.
+A second diffusion layer is a mixdown state between the unreversible
blocksubkeys that is xored with the previous round mixed down subkeys
aka [internal state] of cipher.
+A groundbreaking way to salt the key, where the salted key is hashed
into a plaintext password(by an shuffled expansion algorithm there is
absolutely no way in to retract the orginal key from the original
subkeys.
I could go on forever but as i said i do not want to be picky.
Yes i'm a bit cocky about this ciper but that is just because that it
with all certainity is the strongest cipher ever built, although i
could make a much stronger blockcipher i chose not to, because i feel
there is no need and it would not be as fast and straightforward as
Streambuddy.
I have already implemented a block cipher called BitBastard but it
just do not have the beauty and simplicity of StreamBuddy so why
bother publish it.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
int ordered[256];
int reversed[256];
int streamout[256];
void printout()
{
printf("\n***********************************************************************");
printf("\n*
*");
printf("\n*STREAMBUDDY a cipher by JT [Turbo C 2.01]
*");
printf("\n*(The code looks funny i know but it works mainthing?
*");
printf("\n*Buddy variable sized cipher, key 1>-256 bytes, int state
4096-bits *");
printf("\n*Key is expand into two streams, each run a keybased
shuffle 256bytes *");
printf("\n*Every round the shuffle are dowmmixed to 1 stream with a
saved state *");
printf("\n*Stream A xor B-> mixpad ->xor streamout[savedstate]->xor
plaintxt *");
printf("\n*A zero filled 102 MB file called plain.txt is created at
start +-1min*");
printf("\n*
*");
printf("\n*The encoded file cipher.txt, and the decoded file
decipher.txt +-1min*");
printf("\n*
*");
printf("\n***********************************************************************");
printf("\n\n\n");
}
/*PRNG*/
int streambuddy()
{
int mixpad[256];
int slot_1,slot_2,slot_3,slot_4;
int i;
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
if(i==256){
/*WRAPAROUND CASE*/
slot_1 = ordered[0];
slot_2 = ordered[slot_1];
ordered[slot_1] = ordered[i];
ordered[i] = slot_2;
slot_3 = reversed[0];
slot_4 = reversed[slot_3];
reversed[slot_3] = reversed[i];
reversed[i] = slot_4;
} else {
slot_1 = ordered[i+1];
slot_2 = ordered[slot_1];
ordered[slot_1] = ordered[i];
ordered[i] = slot_2;
slot_3 = reversed[i+1];
slot_4 = reversed[slot_3];
reversed[slot_3] = reversed[i];
reversed[i] = slot_4;
}
}
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
mixpad[i] = reversed[i] ^ ordered[i];
}
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
streamout[i] ^= mixpad[i];
}
return 0;
}
/*KEYXPAND*/
int keyexpander(int key[], int keysize)
{
int serie[256];
int i=0,j=0,k=0;
int stop=0;
int found=0;
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
stop=0;
while(!stop)
{
found = 0;
for(k=0;k<i;k++)
{
if(key[j]==serie[k]){found=1;}
}
if(!found)
{
serie[i]=key[j];stop=1;
} else
{
key[j] = key[j]+1;
}
if(key[j] > 255) {
key[j]=0;
}
}
j++;
if(j > keysize-1) {j=0;}
}
for(k=0;k<42;k++)
{
for(i=0;i<255;i++)
{
int slot_1,slot_2;
slot_1 = serie[i+1];
slot_2 = serie[slot_1];
serie[slot_1] = serie[i];
serie[i] = slot_2;
}
}
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
ordered[i]=serie[i];
}
return 0;
}
int ireverse()
{
int i;int j=0;int slot1;int slot2;
for(i=255;i>-1;i--)
{
reversed[j] = ordered[i];
j++;
}
/*A mechanism to make the reversed block out of phase*/
for(i=0;i<7;i++){
slot1 = reversed[i+1];
slot2 = reversed[slot1];
reversed[slot1] = reversed[i];
reversed[i] = slot2;
}
return 0;
}
int saltIV(int keyread[]){
int i;
srand(clock());
for (i=0;i<4;i++){
keyread[i]=rand()%256;
}
return 0;
}
int decrypt()
{
int keyread[256];
int text[256];
int keysize=0;
int i,j,k;
FILE* in;
FILE* out;
printf("\n\n\nInput password for decode: ");
keysize=4;
in=fopen("cipher.txt","rb");
/*GET KEY SALTIV+PASSWD*/
for(i=0;i<4;i++){keyread[i]=getc(in);}
while ((keyread[keysize]=getchar())!=10){keysize++;}
printf("\n\nIV+password:");
for(i=0;i<keysize;i++){printf("%d",keyread[i]);printf(",");}
/*EXPAND KEY AND CREATE REVERSED SHADOW*/
keyexpander(keyread,keysize);
ireverse();
/*MAKE SURE ARRAY DONT GET FUCKED UP*/
for(i=0;i<256;i++){
streamout[i]=0;
}
printf("\n\n\nWait while decrypt 102 MB to disk...+-1min");
/*DECRYPT FILE*/
out=fopen("decipher.txt","wb");
for(k=0;k<20;k++){
for(j=0;j<20000;j++){
streambuddy();
for(i=0;i<256;i++){
text[i]=getc(in);
text[i]^=streamout[i];
fputc(text[i],out);
}
}
}
fclose(in);
fclose(out);
printf("\n\n\nFINISHED!!");
return 0;
}
int encrypt()
{
int keyread[256];
int text[256];
int keysize=0;
int i,j,k;
FILE* in;
FILE* out;
/*CREATE ZEROFILLED PLAINTEXT*/
printf("\n\n\nWait!! while 102 MB zerofilled plaintext created
+-1min");
out=fopen("plain.txt","wb");
for(k=0;k<20;k++){
for(j=0;j<20000;j++)
{
for(i=0;i<256;i++)
{
fputc('0',out);
}
}
}
fclose(out);
out=fopen("cipher.txt","wb");
keysize=4;
/*CREATE KEY ->IV+PASSWORD*/
saltIV(keyread);
printf("\n\n\nInput password for encode:");
for(i=0;i<4;i++){fputc(keyread[i],out);}
while ((keyread[keysize]=getchar())!=10){keysize++;}
printf("\n\nIV+password:");
for(i=0;i<keysize;i++){printf("%d",keyread[i]);printf(",");}
/*EXPAND KEY AND CREATE REVERSED SHADOW*/
keyexpander(keyread,keysize);
ireverse();
for(i=0;i<256;i++){streamout[i]=0;}
/*ENCRYPT FILE*/
in=fopen("plain.txt","rb");
printf("\n\n\nWait while encrypt 102 MB to disk...+-1 min");
for(k=0;k<20;k++){
for(j=0;j<20000;j++){
streambuddy();
for(i=0;i<256;i++){
text[i]=getc(in);
text[i]^=streamout[i];
fputc(text[i],out);
}
}
}
fclose(in);
fclose(out);
return 0;
}
int main(void){
printout();
encrypt();
decrypt();
return 0;
}
Best regards JT |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Douglas A. Gwyn |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 12:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
JT wrote:
Quote: Yes i'm a bit cocky about this ciper but that is just because that it
with all certainity is the strongest cipher ever built, ...
Ha, ha! I needed a good laugh. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jim Gillogly |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:41 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
jt64@bredband.net (JT) wrote in message news:<2ecfd00b.0401220857.3427db20@posting.google.com>...
Quote: I could go on forever but as i said i do not want to be picky.
Yes i'm a bit cocky about this ciper but that is just because that it
with all certainity is the strongest cipher ever built, although i
could make a much stronger blockcipher i chose not to, because i feel
there is no need and it would not be as fast and straightforward as
Streambuddy.
I have already implemented a block cipher called BitBastard but it
just do not have the beauty and simplicity of StreamBuddy so why
bother publish it.
You also implemented a cipher called MiniTrixor that you posted on 28 August
2003 to sci.crypt, about which you said:
Quote: Small dynamic variable size keypermutation^text cipher, i beleive no attack
except bruteforce..
I posted the solution to the challenge cipher on 30 August 2003.
Are you as confident about this one as you were about your previous one?
--
Jim Gillogly |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Chris Jones |
| Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
jim@acm.org (Jim Gillogly) writes:
Quote: You also implemented a cipher called MiniTrixor that you posted on 28 August
2003 to sci.crypt, about which you said:
Small dynamic variable size keypermutation^text cipher, i beleive no attack
except bruteforce..
I posted the solution to the challenge cipher on 30 August 2003.
Are you as confident about this one as you were about your previous one?
I think he's got every reason to be as confident about this one as he
was about his previous one, and I think he is. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:52 pm
|
|