OCTADE - sci.crypt - Re: Re: MARC stream cipher

Re: Re: MARC stream cipher

<En1RD0uSGGpLgeFOUSf+QJEuupiUpgJaj5D1ohfELL4=@writeable.com>

https://news.octade.net/USENET/article-flat.php?id=205&group=sci.crypt#205

Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: runningman@writeable.com (The Running Man)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Re: MARC stream cipher
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:22:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: EasyNews
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <En1RD0uSGGpLgeFOUSf+QJEuupiUpgJaj5D1ohfELL4=@writeable.com>
References: <aAOdnRI18vgBb3z4nZ2dnZeNn_tg4p2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:22:29 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cd63dcf39e9026d3884d2a147b485233";
logging-data="1976344"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/EpqKrO5Vw+BHp3iWNH26culBvavIU31g="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:r6uzxDXipidjROB+ziJu47o4fuU=

by: The Running Man - Sat, 2 Mar 2024 12:22 UTC

On 01/03/2024 15:22 Leo <test@example.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 01:38:28 -0000 (UTC), The Running Man wrote:
>
>> I still use RC4-Drop(1024) as is. I don't believe anyone can break it
>> and I'd like to see proof if someone claims they can.
>
> Yeah, you need a lot more data to infer anything about the key if you drop
> the earlier, more biased output.
>
> Still, it's worth touching the key schedule as well. Especially if you're
> combining a long-term key and an IV by concatenation. Doesn't hurt to put
> everything through a hash/KDF first or just run more iterations of the RC4
> key schedule.
>
> --
> Leo

I change the key after 4GB of ciphertext generation.

USENET / sci.crypt / Re: Re: MARC stream cipher

USENET / sci.crypt / Re: Re: MARC stream cipher