Fixxing Unbreakable Encryption, Only the exploitative cases Options

[Heath Robinson]

CODE

case 1:
    Bob encrypts his connection to Alice
    Eve initiates decryption on the Bob-Alice connection
    Bob drops the encryption removing Eve's progress
    Goto case 1

The problem here is, by it's very nature, down to the fact that a particular instance of the Encryption is cracked. Dropping the instance and replacing it resets all progress made. Cycling periodically renders nodes impossible to crack.

A solution is to change the Decrypt action to target the node itself instead of the encryption instance (but the action requires a visible instance of encryption that involves that node to work). Hits are maintained between attempts to decrypt different instances created by the node and once a particular instance has been cracked you have the keys for all encryption that node performs until an arbirary date in the future when sufficient new entropy for a fresh master key has been generated.


Quick, dirty, reasonable solution imo. Requesting Comment.

[Darkeus]

Don't you have to intercept the wireless traffic before you can decrypt anything in that example. That requires a roll in itself. Plus I think a Matrix perception test to even find the wireless signal your looking for.

Otherwise, encryption works on a game level. It just isn't realistic.. That is okay though. I think your adding some complexity there.

[Blade]

Or you could consider that it's a given that the Encrypt program is already using such things as periodic cycling and that the decrypt program is somehow able to get around that. Which is more or less the same thing.

[BlueMax]

CODE

case 1:
    Bob encrypts his connection to Alice
    Eve initiates decryption on the Bob-Alice connection
    Bob drops the encryption removing Eve's progress
    Goto case 1

The problem here is, by it's very nature, down to the fact that a particular instance of the Encryption is cracked. Dropping the instance and replacing it resets all progress made. Cycling periodically renders nodes impossible to crack.

A solution is to change the Decrypt action to target the node itself instead of the encryption instance (but the action requires a visible instance of encryption that involves that node to work). Hits are maintained between attempts to decrypt different instances created by the node and once a particular instance has been cracked you have the keys for all encryption that node performs until an arbirary date in the future when sufficient new entropy for a fresh master key has been generated.


Quick, dirty, reasonable solution imo. Requesting Comment.

Err, I don't know how Shadowrun encryption handshakes are completed from either a rules or a pathetic attempt at realism perspective. However, your approach appears something akin to Rotating Key XOR, which would just be a type of encryption. The depth and variance of encryption methods is handled by the rating, and thus Decrypting Bob's line is just one action.

BlueMax

[BlueMax]

Or you could consider that it's a given that the Encrypt program is already using such things as periodic cycling and that the decrypt program is somehow able to get around that. Which is more or less the same thing.

Beat me by that much!

[Draco18s]

Don't you have to intercept the wireless traffic before you can decrypt anything in that example.

Other way around by RAW. You have to decrypt it before you can intercept it.

Yes. It doesn't make any RW sense.

[Darkeus]

Other way around by RAW. You have to decrypt it before you can intercept it.

Yes. It doesn't make any RW sense.

My bad, you are right. Thanks for clearing that up, I was quoting from memory..

No, that makes no sense. Yet, I can see why they do things from a game perspective but logic wise..

[Malachi]

case 1:
Bob encrypts his connection to Alice
Eve initiates decryption on the Bob-Alice connection
Bob drops the encryption removing Eve's progress
Goto case 1

I think you're missing something(s) here. First, dropping the encryption on a connection certainly would "removing Eve's progress" in a way, but she would automatically succeed at that point. Now, if you're talking about a situation where Bob is "cycling" the Encryption to Alice, then you're missing some rules from Unwired regarding changing the Encryption on a connection:

Signals encryption may be restored by closing the subscription
(a Log Off action), re-establishing the subscription (a Log On
action), and then re-encrypting the subscription (a Simple Action
from each side of the link).

So, to do what you're talking about would require:

1. Bob encrypts his connection to Alice
2. Eve initiates decryption of the Bob-Alice connection
3. Bob drops his connection to Alice
4. Bob re-connects to Alice
5. Goto top

Is this more secure? Sure. Is it annoying for the parties that constantly have to disconnect and re-connect? Absolutely. Incidentally, the same section of Unwired states that if the Encryption is on an entire Node, then the Node must be rebooted before Encryption can be changed. Is this realistic? No, but it is balanced from a game perspective.

[Heath Robinson]

Err, I don't know how Shadowrun encryption handshakes are completed from either a rules or a pathetic attempt at realism perspective. However, your approach appears something akin to Rotating Key XOR, which would just be a type of encryption. The depth and variance of encryption methods is handled by the rating, and thus Decrypting Bob's line is just one action.

Eh? No, I just assume that bob has a master key store that gets reused across encryption instances. For example, bob has one set of keys which he uses all the time. The more times Eve sees him use keys out that store the more progress she can make towards deriving the master key and rendering all his further encryption attempts ineffective.

Or you could consider that it's a given that the Encrypt program is already using such things as periodic cycling and that the decrypt program is somehow able to get around that. Which is more or less the same thing.

Yes. It's more or less the same thing. However, you're presenting a bag-o'-rats clause. That's worse than just redesigning cryptanalysis.

I think you're missing something(s) here. First, dropping the encryption on a connection certainly would "removing Eve's progress" in a way, but she would automatically succeed at that point. Now, if you're talking about a situation where Bob is "cycling" the Encryption to Alice, then you're missing some rules from Unwired regarding changing the Encryption on a connection:

You must surely understand why I would miss that out, or intentionally block it from my memory. That rule's beyond belief. This is the true evil of bag-o'-ratsing. It's not that I really blame the devs - not wanting to change existing rules is a virtu... Wait one damn moment!

[Malachi]

You must surely understand why I would miss that out, or intentionally block it from my memory. That rule's beyond belief. This is the true evil of bag-o'-ratsing. It's not that I really blame the devs - not wanting to change existing rules is a virtu... Wait one damn moment!

*shrug* Rules in games are made for game-mechanics reasons all the time. Your OP states that the situation is "broken," and the rule from Unwired certainly mitigates the "break." Thus, one accepts the way that it is for pure game mechanics reasons and moves on. Even FrankTrollman's alternate Matrix rules, which seem to be written primarily as a platform for him to complain about encryption, take fantastic liberties with the laws of electricity and physics for the sake of favourable game mechanics. That's ok. It's a game.

[Heath Robinson]

Mmm, but Frank's stuff at least states outright that it's taking fantastic liberties. The problem with the Matrix is that normal people are now familiar with something analogous to what it claims to emulate. To the point where they start going "oh, I know X" and then the rules turn around and say "oh, no, you don't". That's where the rage comes from - when you know things and the rules go off and actually contradict those things without making it sufficiently clear that the game isn't even trying to emulate the real world.

The Matrix should seriously be wordfiltered into nonsense terms for the sake of not misleading everybody.

[BlueMax]

The Matrix should seriously be wordfiltered into nonsense terms for the sake of not misleading everybody.

This I can strongly agree with and back. If they had not tried to "real-iffy" the matrix, the information would have been easier to assimilate. Right now its a big ol heap of namespace collision.

I want my Megapulses!

BlueMax

[Malachi]

Mmm, but Frank's stuff at least states outright that it's taking fantastic liberties.

Except for the part where he goes on for pages about why encryption can't be hacked. That's what bothers me the most about Frank's rules. He goes on for blah blah blah about encryption, using technology capabilities from right now as his basis for argument, and then later gives Hackers the ability to affect circuitry that is OFF, at a range of Line of Sight, by manipulating the very electrons that may or may not be present in it, at the quantum level ("or something").... but faster decryption is way beyond suspension of disbelief... oh well.

[Heath Robinson]

Frank's mostly talking about OTPs. These are cryptographically unbreakable. Not "it would take you until the sun eats us" unbreakable. I mean that they are unbreakable without knowing the key (which can be huge). There exist no attacks on an OTP. With all the data recording and storage in 2070 it's not implausible that OTPs are actually in far more widespread usage than today. It's easy to step outside and take a recording of traffic noise then apply an app to it to get pure entropy, then use that entropy to render your data unbreakable until you have the key.


And if you can get LOS to the device that contains the key then you can just extract the key and use it.

[Malachi]

Frank's mostly talking about OTPs. These are cryptographically unbreakable. Not "it would take you until the sun eats us" unbreakable. I mean that they are unbreakable without knowing the key (which can be huge). There exist no attacks on an OTP. With all the data recording and storage in 2070 it's not implausible that OTPs are actually in far more widespread usage than today. It's easy to step outside and take a recording of traffic noise then apply an app to it to get pure entropy, then use that entropy to render your data unbreakable until you have the key.


And if you can get LOS to the device that contains the key then you can just extract the key and use it.

I know what Frank was talking about. I read his pages and pages of blah blah. There exists no current attacks on OTP encryption. However, the RAW in Unwired provide alternate methods that could simulate OTP's: "Strong Encryption." What I find hypocritical/hard to swallow are the rules talking about affecting circuitry that is off by simply bombarding EM radiation at it (wireless signals) powering up the circuit at a range of line of sight and then affecting the circuit at the molecular level to re-route electrons to get the circuit to do what you want. Those rules describe a world where the mind/machine meld is such to the point where signal processing is capable of all of the above, but we don't have good enough math to decrypt signals.

I know there are no current methods for cracking OTPs... but also currently can't power my cell phone by holding it in line-of-sight of a cell phone tower.

[Fix-it]

CODE

case 1:
    Bob encrypts his connection to Alice
    Eve initiates decryption on the Bob-Alice connection
    Bob drops the encryption removing Eve's progress
    Goto case 1

The problem here is, by it's very nature, down to the fact that a particular instance of the Encryption is cracked. Dropping the instance and replacing it resets all progress made. Cycling periodically renders nodes impossible to crack.

A solution is to change the Decrypt action to target the node itself instead of the encryption instance (but the action requires a visible instance of encryption that involves that node to work). Hits are maintained between attempts to decrypt different instances created by the node and once a particular instance has been cracked you have the keys for all encryption that node performs until an arbirary date in the future when sufficient new entropy for a fresh master key has been generated.


Quick, dirty, reasonable solution imo. Requesting Comment.

so basically, instead of trying to break the actual encryption, you're running side channel attacks. not a bad idea.

[BlueMax]

All of that was about tech and crypto today. We need a flag for Fantasy Science and one for Real Science. And maybe a "I read Schneier's webpage so I must know crypto!" flag.

Also, no need to wait for 2070 for a key manager. A hardware and several POS software Key Managers are already available. There was a little outfit in Redwood City that made an amazing Key Manager.

Shadowrun computing is running on different mathematical paradigms. They cannot be explained because they are ahead (or to the side) of us.

BlueMax
/as for my TRNG, I prefer temp flux

[Heath Robinson]

I know what Frank was talking about. I read his pages and pages of blah blah. There exists no current attacks on OTP encryption.

I know there are no current methods for cracking OTPs... but also currently can't power my cell phone by holding it in line-of-sight of a cell phone tower.

There exist no theoretically possible attacks on OTP encryption. It just can't exist. There's no reuse of any bit of entropy - every bit of the plaintext is combined with an independant phenomena such that you can't pry things apart at all. It's a mathematically impossibility. You can't even guess because keysizes are ridiculous (making the chance of getting it right pretty much 0) and there are millions of keys that lead to data that is valid but utterly, utterly wrong.

There is no attack on OTP because you've taken 2 sources of entropy and you've come out with only as much entropy as was in the larger source. You can only transform it back into the smaller source of entropy by knowing the bigger source of entropy and subtracting it out. It's fucking impossible by Information Theory to crack it. It's unrealistic to posit any kind of attack and doing so renders your argument for the verisimilitude of the setting null, void, and insane.

In terms of something closer to home: Bitwise XOR. Actually used for some OTP implementations. A XOR B = 6. Can you tell me what A or B are? This is an actual OTP. A trivial case admittedly, but there's nothing in the universe that can tell you what A or B are from just the "ciphertext" without knowing it's complement.


We've got cellphones so small that they're difficult to actually push the buttons on. We still haven't put plumbers out of their jobs. I still don't have my jetpack, or flying car. There are no rayguns. No Mars mission. No monolith. No AI.

[The Jake]

Isn't this why Unwired explicitly states all crypto is crackable? That sidebar allows for GMs to introduce uncrackable crypto as a special plot hook.

You have to assume the rules cover the process or you go mad.

Who is to say that computational speeds and heuristic analysis can't determine patterns in algorithm and key selection? Also for an eavesdropping attacker able to intercept the key exchange, things change dramatically.

Suspension of disbelief people. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

- J.

[Cthulhudreams]

Shadowrun 4th ed has wireless power transmission by the way, Microwave power sats where first deployed in like 2006. The technology may have come along in the intervening 64 years.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

My bad, you are right. Thanks for clearing that up, I was quoting from memory..

No, that makes no sense. Yet, I can see why they do things from a game perspective but logic wise..

But you still must detect the traffic before you can decrypt it...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

There exist no theoretically possible attacks on OTP encryption. It just can't exist. There's no reuse of any bit of entropy - every bit of the plaintext is combined with an independant phenomena such that you can't pry things apart at all. It's a mathematically impossibility. You can't even guess because keysizes are ridiculous (making the chance of getting it right pretty much 0) and there are millions of keys that lead to data that is valid but utterly, utterly wrong.

There is no attack on OTP because you've taken 2 sources of entropy and you've come out with only as much entropy as was in the larger source. You can only transform it back into the smaller source of entropy by knowing the bigger source of entropy and subtracting it out. It's fucking impossible by Information Theory to crack it. It's unrealistic to posit any kind of attack and doing so renders your argument for the verisimilitude of the setting null, void, and insane.

In terms of something closer to home: Bitwise XOR. Actually used for some OTP implementations. A XOR B = 6. Can you tell me what A or B are? This is an actual OTP. A trivial case admittedly, but there's nothing in the universe that can tell you what A or B are from just the "ciphertext" without knowing it's complement.


We've got cellphones so small that they're difficult to actually push the buttons on. We still haven't put plumbers out of their jobs. I still don't have my jetpack, or flying car. There are no rayguns. No Mars mission. No monolith. No AI.

Why the Rant? It is just a game...

[Heath Robinson]

Isn't this why Unwired explicitly states all crypto is crackable? That sidebar allows for GMs to introduce uncrackable crypto as a special plot hook.

You have to assume the rules cover the process or you go mad.

Who is to say that computational speeds and heuristic analysis can't determine patterns in algorithm and key selection? Also for an eavesdropping attacker able to intercept the key exchange, things change dramatically.

Suspension of disbelief people. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Except that it's Malachi's argument that encryption that is fundamentally unbreakable today should magically become breakable tomorrow without the invention of an oracle. It's insane that the idea of unbreakable encryption (which exists today and is on Mathematically proven grounds) is apparently less believable than technology which allows you to induce the currents in a device within LOS in a consistant, reliable manner that lets you turn people off.


I forgot to mention that the unbreakability of an OTP is positively proven. It's not that no attacks currently exist for it, there are no attacks for it. The distinction is subtle but extremely important.

Why the Rant? It is just a game...

People are wrong. On the internet. They have no excuse because Wikipedia is just over there. And when you link them to a relevent article THEY IGNORE IT! I put a lot of work into learning shit so that I know where I can sensibly stand. It's offensive when someone refuses to put even a little bit of effort into understanding the area THEY ARE ARGUING ABOUT. It's basic courtesy to know what the fuck you're spouting off about.

And this isn't even a game. This is someone arguing that the big believability problem he has with Frank's rules are that they use actual real encryption that has been positively proven unbreakable. That's like stating that the big believability problem you have with the SR4 rules are that pieces of metal flying through the air are still inimical to unprotected human lives.

[Draco18s]

I forgot to mention that the unbreakability of an OTP is positively proven. It's not that no attacks currently exist for it, there are no attacks for it. The distinction is subtle but extremely important.

Correct. It has to do with the fact that if you have a 100 character long plain text and a 100 long cyphertext using a OTP then every possible 100 character message can be encoded in the same cyphertext, just using a different key.

[Draco18s]

I forgot to mention that the unbreakability of an OTP is positively proven. It's not that no attacks currently exist for it, there are no attacks for it. The distinction is subtle but extremely important.

Correct. It has to do with the fact that if you have a 100 character long plain text and a 100 long cyphertext using a OTP then every possible 100 character message can be encoded in the same cyphertext, just using a different key.