News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'. Parent comment

Re:Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut' by appleflaxen on Monday October 17, 2016 @05:11AM (#12723576)
the good news is that you don't even need to encrypt your data, if they are random to start with.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut' by amelius on Monday October 17, 2016 @05:43AM (#12723700)
That might be tricky. An encrypted file may have some properties a random file does not have in general.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut' by Ao7bei3s on Monday October 17, 2016 @07:56AM (#12724238)
No, unless the algorithm is broken.

Ciphertext indistiguishability[1] is a basic requirement for any encryption scheme. All modern ciphers are designed to make that hard.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinguishing_attack

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut' by amelius on Monday October 17, 2016 @08:18AM (#12724346)
Yes, but you remove that attack vector simply by encrypting a random file instead.
[ Parent | on HN ]