Re:Hashing is not encryption
by Karliss on Sunday January 09, 2022 @06:46AM
(#29862441)
Neither is OTP secure if you reuse the key. One of main properties of OTP is that an encrypted message could be decrypted to any message of same size. In case of block cyphers and message longer than one block only a fraction of all messages can be obtained. So if you had enough compute resource(and it wasn't more than atoms in universe) for brute force or weakness was found in cyphers you could find which of the potential decrypted messages makes sense and is more likely.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> Neither is OTP secure if you reuse the key.
I thought the OT meant "One Time". Reusing the key would take the key from singular to plural usage, no?
Yes, but I was explaining that no reuse requirement can be equally important for encryption schemes that don't have it included in the name. Claiming that one of them is worse than other because of number reuse even though doing so is equally wrong for both is not a good example.
Yup, but itβs more useful to talk about that reuse as a bad implementation of one-time pads than it is to call it something other than OTP.
In the classic sense of a small paper pad used by spies, reuse was fairly common because of the logistical problem of supplying agents with fresh pads.