A quick question...

[Paul Walker]

On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 08:33:59AM +1000, Greg Rose wrote:

> common values. It also relies on using some rawly implemented RSA, so that
> all that is in the RSA payload is the hash, and nothing else. This
> violates all the standards that specify that the payload should be padded

The code which implements all of this has to run in <6KB of code space, so
it's entirely possible that they hacked together their own routines to deal
with it. Almost certain, in fact - I don't think there's a compiler
available, so any library would have to be rewritten in assembler anyway.

(Sorry I can't be more precise here, but I'm sure you can appreciate why.)

[snip explanation]
> Others may want to correct me or elaborate further, but I think that's 
> correct.

It certainly makes much more sense than the scrambled version I had before,
and fits with what cryptography I already knew. I still don't think it's a
particularly *practical* attack, but I could easily be wrong there, and it
only needs one. ;-)

Many thanks for your time!

Cheers,

-- 
Paul

                      "I'm not sure if this is a good or a bad thing.
                  Probably a bad thing;  most things are bad things."
                                                 -- Nile Evil Bastard

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com