[13206] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: my take on "PCP"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Kelsey)
Mon May 5 16:58:15 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 12:51:02 -0400
To: Ralf Senderek <ralf@senderek.de>
From: John Kelsey <kelsey.j@ix.netcom.com>
Cc: <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0305050706360.1038-100000@safe.senderek.de>
At 07:11 AM 5/5/03 +0200, Ralf Senderek wrote:
...
>And fortunately my seriousness does not at all depend on the fact
>whether or not I managed to get it into your favourite crypto journal.
>Not seeing it in print will never prevent further analysis.
Yes, it will. Most of the people who are likely to try cryptanalyzing a
new crypto primitive have good reasons to want a better publication
list--like they want to get tenure, or they want to get better job offers,
or they want to get into a good graduate program. It's much easier getting
an attack published on a published design, even if it's not widely
used. An attack on Helix is pretty likely to get into FSE, if you have
one. An attack on your design is much less likely to get into FSE, or any
similar conference. For prospective attackers with limited time, and a
real need to get some peer-reviewed publications, this suggests a good
strategy for getting a lot of review for your new primitive....
>Ralf.
--John Kelsey, kelsey.j@ix.netcom.com
PGP: FA48 3237 9AD5 30AC EEDD BBC8 2A80 6948 4CAA F259
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
