Re: [pen] would it be fair to say...

[Paul A Parkanzky <pparkanz@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm only replying to this because it looks like no one else has yet...

  If you use public key encryption then you shouldn't have to worry about
man in the middle attacks on the key because the key used to decrypt the
message is never supposed to be exchanged.

  "Better" implementations fix problems if they are really "better", so
that statement is vacuously true.

..TMG..

p.s It is true that larger keys are needed as processing power increases.


On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, RiX Nu¥eN wrote:

> that the two most common attacks on cryptographic systems are:
> 1. attacking the key (getting it in plaintext)or the key exchange system
> (man in the middle attacks, exploiting trust relationships)
>
> 2. taking advantage of reduced key spaces to brute force keys.
>
> the second one can be fixed with better implementations. but how do you
> prevent the first? esp. in satellite/wireless based systems. (like directv)
> for example if you were to use a key exchange system in satellite/ground
> network one could float a balloon between the ground and the satellite and
> man in the middle that way...
>
> i'm just wondering because it seems like by moving away from wires (hell
> even moving from switched to routed) that one is *reducing* the amount of
> trust they have with any given peer.
>
> -RiX
>
> p.s would it also be far to say that keys naturally get weaker over time
> simply because processing ability improves? (i'm sure some designers take
> this into account but what if there is something they don't know about?)
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>