physorg.com— A new encryption system, which its creators say is unbreakable, got its first test run Wednesday in Vienna, scientists from the European Union project SECOQC announced.
Oct 8, 2008View in Crawl 4
Skemez does have a point. We believe it's unbreakable, but we barely even understand why these phenomena occur. It's entirely possible that 5 years from now we will discover ways of breaking this. Even if it is based on physical laws, those laws are often misunderstood (e.g. Newton vs. Einstein). As we continue to refine these laws, we may very well find exceptions that leave this encryption "breakable".Either way, trying to break the encryption is like trying to break down the wall when the door is open. Encryption is far from being the weakest link in the chain of modern systems of security.
Actually, some things ARE provable. If it can be proven that an encryption scheme is unbreakable without the proper key then it is provably unbreakable, even before anybody has tested it.One-time pads are not considered unbreakable because we have been trying for 30 years and haven't yet found a way to break them. They are unbreakable because it has been mathematically proven that (when properly used) any cipher text can be decrypted to any message of the same length.Of course, the scheme in this article is not provably unbreakable. In fact, due to it's basis in physics rather than maths, it won't be possible to prove that it's unbreakable.The difference is in what you said: "An experiment can never be proven before the experiment is even run!"This encryption scheme is based in physics and we don't know everything about physics yet. Physics is all about experiments. There are no experiments in maths.
Closed AccountOct 10, 2008
The DaVinci Code. Can that be broken?
revengOct 10, 2008
Skemez does have a point. We believe it's unbreakable, but we barely even understand why these phenomena occur. It's entirely possible that 5 years from now we will discover ways of breaking this. Even if it is based on physical laws, those laws are often misunderstood (e.g. Newton vs. Einstein). As we continue to refine these laws, we may very well find exceptions that leave this encryption "breakable".Either way, trying to break the encryption is like trying to break down the wall when the door is open. Encryption is far from being the weakest link in the chain of modern systems of security.
lingnoiOct 11, 2008
I like how people are burying your comment, like they're trying to stop the true from coming out. lol.
Closed AccountOct 11, 2008
If it can be built it can be destroyed. Simple reasoning
elitexeroOct 21, 2008
10-20 mins from boot until key. You've obviously never done it before.
elitexeroOct 21, 2008
Yes it was.
ladadadadaOct 23, 2008
Actually, some things ARE provable. If it can be proven that an encryption scheme is unbreakable without the proper key then it is provably unbreakable, even before anybody has tested it.One-time pads are not considered unbreakable because we have been trying for 30 years and haven't yet found a way to break them. They are unbreakable because it has been mathematically proven that (when properly used) any cipher text can be decrypted to any message of the same length.Of course, the scheme in this article is not provably unbreakable. In fact, due to it's basis in physics rather than maths, it won't be possible to prove that it's unbreakable.The difference is in what you said: "An experiment can never be proven before the experiment is even run!"This encryption scheme is based in physics and we don't know everything about physics yet. Physics is all about experiments. There are no experiments in maths.