On 2015-06-26, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Jon Ribbens ><jon+use...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote: >> Well, it means you need to send 256 times as much data, which is a >> start. If you're instead using a 256-byte translation table then >> an attack becomes utterly impractical. > > Utterly impractical? Maybe, if you attempt a pure brute-force approach > - there are 256! possible translation tables, which is roughly e500 > attempts [1], and at roughly four a microsecond [2] that'd still take > a ridiculously long time. But there are two gigantic optimizations you > could do. Firstly, there are frequency-based attacks,
No, there aren't. As I already said, the attacker does not have the ciphertext. He can't do anything related to frequency analysis. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
