Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>An encrypted signal can't be "too random"

It should if encryption is good. After all, security proofs for encryption define "secure" as "indistinguishable from random".



A signal that contains anything other than noise can not be absolutely indistinguishable from noise. Otherwise you won't be able to decrypt it.


It's computationally distinguishable from noise iff you have the decryption key.

The key word here is "computationally". A signal encrypted with a non-OTP symmetric key can be distinguished from noise without the key — unfortunately, for modern key sizes (128, 196, or 256 bits), the cost of doing so is prohibitively expensive for even arbitrarily advanced civilizations, unless (as Brice Schneier put it) they are building computers out of something other than matter that occupy something other than space.


> Otherwise you won't be able to decrypt it.

Why not?


Because the only way to make your signal appear more random is to add more redundancy. In order to make it look like an absolute random signal you'd have to add infinite redundancy.


Redundant data is compressible data.

Random data is not compressible.

Adding redundant data to random data will make it more compressible - less random.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: