WikiLeaks Crackers

[John Clizbe]

Faramir wrote:
> David Shaw escribió:
>> On Apr 7, 2010, at 3:18 AM, Andre Amorim wrote:
> 
>>> What type of encryption the WikiLeaks said to have broken? AES ?
> ...
>> I do not think that this is a break of any serious crypto, though. If 
>> someonecould arrange for AES or any other strong cipher to be broken simply
>> by asking for it on a web site, this would be news.
> 
>   Right, I was interested on the subject too, and wondering what kind of
> encryption could have been used to encrypt the file. I guess David is
> right and the key chosen was too weak... but it would be nice to hear
> about what was actually the method used to encrypt and how did they
> break it.

There was a comment in Schneier's blog pointing to an article at
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/ saying that it was a plain old run-of-the-mill
dictionary attack of several million entries.

*yawn* Not really crypto news

-- 
John P. Clizbe                      Inet:John (a) Mozilla-Enigmail.org
You can't spell fiasco without SCO. hkp://keyserver.gingerbear.net  or
     mailto:pgp-public-keys at gingerbear.net?subject=HELP

Q:"Just how do the residents of Haiku, Hawai'i hold conversations?"
A:"An odd melody / island voices on the winds / surplus of vowels"

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 499 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20100408/ee5c41d0/attachment.pgp>