Anonymous ID: fa4761 Feb. 25, 2023, 3:02 p.m. No.18410994   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1009 >>1045

encryption is built to be intentionally insecure.

 

every major group has systems to crack. never listen to how "many years" it would take a computer to crack.

 

That's only by brute force. brute force is not used.

 

Probably the main method is the known plaintext attack. AES is susceptible to this, because the block data is sequential.

 

256-bit relates to a block of 32 characters. So an attacker can use large piece of known plaintext 32 characters and calculate the key more easily than brute force.

 

This can be HTTP headers (very uniform data), HTML files (also very uniform) or anything else.

 

For functional security, there needs to be much bigger blocks. Approaching typical filesizes.

 

Also, a principle should be maintained of constant-time encryption. If computers double in power, the encryption factors should be increased yearly to maintain a constant time of encryption.

 

The US stayed on 128-bit AES for a stupid and pathetically long time

Anonymous ID: fa4761 Feb. 25, 2023, 3:02 p.m. No.18411009   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>18410994

>For functional security, there needs to be much bigger blocks. Approaching typical filesizes.

>

>Also, a principle should be maintained of constant-time encryption. If computers double in power, the encryption factors should be increased yearly to maintain a constant time of encryption.

 

Also, there should be a principle that non-entropic data is encrypted seperately from real data.

 

Non-entropic data is standard headers, things like this.

 

The good encryption must have a list of non-entropic data and encrypt that data seperately with a separate key.

 

Therefore this standard is a 2-key standard.

Anonymous ID: fa4761 Feb. 25, 2023, 3:02 p.m. No.18411145   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>18411064

>>is there more?

>good breakdown here:

>https://rumble.com/v2ato8w-arizona-senate-elections-and-house-oversight-deep-dive-w-supporting-forensi.html

 

TY