What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by jacquesm on Saturday March 11, 2017 @09:25AM (#13845488)

A signature is a trap-door, encryption is reversible. So they are two entirely different things, you can't use a signature hash for encryption.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by wyager on Saturday March 11, 2017 @04:07PM (#13847268)

You are correct, but we're talking about asymmetric key crypto in general, not just encryption. Presumably the GP is referring to quantum-resistant hash-based signature schemes such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_signature_scheme

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by snakeanus on Saturday March 11, 2017 @09:34AM (#13845515)

I am not claiming that you can though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by jacquesm on Saturday March 11, 2017 @10:01AM (#13845610)

Then you probably meant to start a new thread. The one you are replying to is about encryption exclusively.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by snakeanus on Saturday March 11, 2017 @10:34AM (#13845720)

Nope, the poster I replied to talked about asymmetric crypto in general, which includes signatures.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What the CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works by jacquesm on Saturday March 11, 2017 @11:14AM (#13845874)

I think that was in reference to public key cryptography, not in reference to hashing, but I'll leave it to the OP to clarify, that's at least how I interpreted it.

[ Parent | on HN ]