[HN Gopher] Military Cryptanalytics, Part III
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Military Cryptanalytics, Part III
        
       Author : oedmarap
       Score  : 62 points
       Date   : 2021-01-06 10:07 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.schneier.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.schneier.com)
        
       | arithmomachist wrote:
       | Fascinating to see the highest state of the art of pre-digital
       | cryptography, right before it was rendered obsolete. Very
       | evocative that volumes 4-6 were planned but never completed,
       | presumably because the first crop of modern encryption schemes
       | were already outdating theses volumes as they were being written.
       | 
       | I wish the NSA would declassify more records of what it managed
       | to break in the pre-digital era, now that the methods are out of
       | date and the people involved are mostly dead. It would be great
       | for historians to see both what the agency was capable of in that
       | period, and how its methods, together with its successes and
       | failures, shaped history in the early Cold War.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | _wldu wrote:
       | _" If there is any lesson for today, it's that modern
       | cryptanalysis is possible primarily because people make
       | mistakes"_
       | 
       | Here's a toy one-time pad implementation I did (years ago) in
       | C++. I just recently implemented it in Go too. These are pretty
       | simple to write, but I wonder if I've made mistakes.
       | 
       | code: https://github.com/62726164/padder
       | 
       | blog: https://www.go350.com/posts/padder-a-one-time-pad-
       | implementa...
        
         | enriquto wrote:
         | How do you transmit the pad in the first place? I guess you
         | have to specify that if you propose a complete system.
        
           | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
           | > How do you transmit the pad in the first place?
           | 
           | That's one advantage that a military crypto system has over a
           | civilian one in that they already have well established
           | physical identity and authentication. They can take advantage
           | of that to deliver the one time pad. For example, before a
           | ship goes on deployment, it can be loaded up with the one
           | time pad. Similarly for a division being deployed.
        
             | 35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote:
             | Military crypto systems have rarely been based around one-
             | time pads. One time pads are difficult to use and extremely
             | slow in practice because you have to work by hand to
             | decrypt a message. A cipher machine is hard to make
             | mistakes with and can disseminate information quickly in
             | both directions. That's why you don't load up ships with
             | hundreds of pages of OTPs, you put an Enigma (or modern
             | equivalent ;)) on board.
             | 
             | One time pads are useful for _espionage_ , and you can see
             | examples of how they are used here[1]. They took advantage
             | of how most espionage worked (and who knows, may still
             | work!): different channels for sending and receiving. The
             | numbers station read you a short message, and if you needed
             | to send a message back you signaled your handler to meet in
             | person at a prearranged place.
             | 
             | The same thing that makes OTPs suck on ships make them
             | excellent for sending short messages to spies. You can't
             | hide an Enigma in a walnut, after all!
             | 
             | [1]: https://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/otp/index.htm
        
               | todd8 wrote:
               | One time pads are difficult to use in Military settings
               | because rarely is communication going on between just two
               | participants. With the number of units needing to
               | communicate some foolproof means for not using
               | overlapping sequences of the one time pads between
               | different parties is essential. Otherwise, a technique
               | known as multiple anagramming can be used to reveal the
               | plaintext.
               | 
               | Generating a secure paper and pencil one time pad is very
               | easy on a computer and can be expected to be completely
               | secure if used properly. Of course, distributing,
               | coordinating, and updating the pads is a weakness of such
               | a system.
               | 
               | In the electronic era, messages can still be encrypted
               | with digital one-time pads and this was the case years
               | ago when the secure "hot-line" between the Soviet
               | Leadership and the US president used such a system to
               | communicate. (The hot line wasn't a phone but a
               | teletype.) This was a perfect use case, a single pair of
               | end points resulting in an unbreakable use of the digital
               | one time pad.
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | One time pads don't necessarily have to be pen and paper.
               | You can distribute a MicroSD card with 128GB of random
               | bits that is used to encode/decode messages. An
               | additional advantage of a system like this is the OTP can
               | be encrypted so if it is captured it can't be used to
               | decrypt old messages without further getting key material
               | from the end user (possibly with a pipe wrench).
               | 
               | The biggest problem is that no matter what, the OTP ends
               | up being some sort of physical medium that requires
               | shipping to the end user. But really it's a scaled up
               | version of the key distribution problem.
        
               | 35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote:
               | > An additional advantage of a system like this is the
               | OTP can be encrypted so if it is captured it can't be
               | used to decrypt old messages without further getting key
               | material from the end user (possibly with a pipe wrench).
               | 
               | That problem has already been solved and the websites you
               | visit today (should!) be working the same way:
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy
               | 
               | > the key distribution problem
               | 
               | That is _the_ hardest problem, especially in a system
               | where you 've got military units in unfriendly areas.
        
               | mikewarot wrote:
               | Erasing the parts of the pad that have already been used,
               | overwriting them with new hardware generated random
               | numbers would seem to help out forward secrecy. Or am I
               | missing something?
        
               | adolph wrote:
               | One of the fun things about using the Army one time pads
               | is that depending on how much leeway one had with the
               | words in the message, you could adjust things to spell
               | out stuff in the encrypted string.
        
               | Mvandenbergh wrote:
               | Also worth noting that most military communications are
               | only sensitive if broken quickly, secret messages sent in
               | espionage might need to stay secret for decades against
               | potentially new mathematical attacks and hardware
               | developments.
        
             | baud147258 wrote:
             | I think the ship would be loaded with a big stack of one
             | time pad, not just one, because that'd severely limit the
             | number of message they could send
        
               | filleokus wrote:
               | I don't have any knowledge about this, but an 8 TB SSD
               | would probably last quite a while, especially for a ship
               | with limited bandwidth out at see. (Of course there are
               | probably multiple disks, not least for redundancy, since
               | the space/weight concern is completely negligible)
        
               | lb1lf wrote:
               | Uneducated guess - the ability to quickly completely and
               | utterly obliterating the pad would probably be a much
               | more significant concern than space or weight.
               | 
               | After all, you don't want your cipher desk, OTP and all
               | to be overrun by opfor just as you are encoding "we are
               | being boarded!"
        
               | todd8 wrote:
               | In World War II, navy code books were bound with lead
               | covers to make it easy to safely jettison the books
               | overboard if necessary.
               | 
               | Such code books where a bit like dictionaries containing
               | random alphanumeric sequences for each useful plaintext
               | word. This was then subjected to an additional layer of
               | encipherment. Such a code was generally beyond the
               | ability of foes to break.
               | 
               | Many years past the battle of Midway, it was finally
               | revealed that the US had broken the Japanese Navy code
               | known as "Purple", explaining the United States lucky
               | outcome in that important battle. I believe it was
               | through a combination of obtaining one of the code books
               | and cryptanalysis.
        
               | TheAdamAndChe wrote:
               | The nice thing about a OTP is that it's only used once,
               | unlike a typical cipher. If pads are lost, well that's
               | fine because they weren't going to be used with anyone
               | else.
        
               | lb1lf wrote:
               | True, but with the (used) pads you can reconstruct past
               | messages.
               | 
               | (Provided you intercepted those, that is.)
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | Sure, but it's also easy to have a system where the pad
               | is destroyed after it is used. This would help insure
               | that nobody messes up and uses the same bits twice as
               | well.
        
               | _wldu wrote:
               | You can also have a separate set of pads that decrypt the
               | messages to something entirely different from the real
               | messages. I'm not aware of another crypto system that
               | allows for this. Here's an example:                   $
               | padder -d -m c2wrbumxvj8gob34mxn46pxg29a6kxnwfhcaam3en-
               | hr-2v -p ryxrvqnlhz04icqq6eg56cuhg10vlx5dff3ba44wg6ic-kd
               | 
               | PlainText: we-are-moving-north-and-will-attack-at-the-
               | pass                   $ padder -d -m
               | c2wrbumxvj8gob34mxn46pxg29a6kxnwfhcaam3en-hr-2v -p
               | zifs6d9dgk36k94m9d5x77jhj277ip59gw9btmv4j7in-kc
               | 
               | PlainText: our-group-fled-south-to-the-city-we-sailed-
               | east
        
             | krisoft wrote:
             | Ships receiving key material for a deployment is how you
             | get a John Walker spy ring situation. You are right that
             | the military has some advantages regarding key
             | distribution, but it's still not a trivial task.
        
           | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
           | Number stations :)
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | Well, they do call it a toy implementation.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-08 23:01 UTC)