I’ve been told that the Twofish encryption algorithm is mentioned in the book Abuse of Power, in the first paragraph of Chapter 3. Did the terrorists use it? Did our hero break it? I am unlikely to read it; can someone scan the page for me.
EDITED TO ADD (10/25): Google Books has it:
The line was picked up after three rings. The cell phones were encrypted using a Twofish algorithm and a 4096-bit Diffie-Hellman key exchange.
No one would be listening in.
try this link, wait a moment for the book to open, last page of the sample:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312651619/counterpane/#reader_B004TLHPYU
Pete • October 25, 2011 1:48 PM
In case at some point in the future, those links aren’t available, the referenced text is: “The line was picked up after three rings. The cell phones were encrypted using a Twofish algorithm and a 4096-bit Diffie-Hellman key exchange. No one would be listening in.”
Ido • October 25, 2011 1:55 PM
Actually the link you gave (at amazon) shows a preview – up to where it is mentioned… click the “look inside” (the book image) and scroll.
I can send a screen capture if you want.
4096? Why so many?
Petréa Mitchell • October 25, 2011 2:34 PM
Pete:
Encrypting a physical object sounds like a neat trick.
I suppose someday when matter transmission is invented, it’s going to be a necessity…
lazlo • October 25, 2011 2:59 PM
@Petréa Mitchell: I’ve developed a thermite-based physical device hashing function…
Emile Berliner • October 25, 2011 3:11 PM
“No one would be listening in”
One of these days someone will invent a device that can pick up audible communications.
Clive Robinson • October 25, 2011 3:20 PM
@ Lazlo,
“I’ve developed a thermite-based physical device hashing function…”
Sounds like a hot pick product…
Chris • October 25, 2011 3:45 PM
But how big was the symmetric key?
Paula Product • October 25, 2011 3:57 PM
“The cell phones were encrypted using a Twofish algorithm and a 4096-bit Diffie-Hellman key exchange. No one would be listening in.”
If only a similar process were applied to Michael Savage’s radio program…
Gabriel • October 25, 2011 4:27 PM
Unfortunately, if Michael Savage’s program were encrypted with ten different twofish keys, I’m afraid the hate will still leak out of the ciphertext.
Regarding encrypting a physical product, I’m sure we’ll see that happen soon, in the form of copy protection against 3D printers. You will probably see a DRM path between PC and printer, and of course, scrambling of physical objects to make them harder to scan a 3D model.
Dirk Praet • October 25, 2011 5:07 PM
@ Pete
I wonder what an encrypted cell phone would look like. Maybe whe should tip off the TSA that anyone observed at an airport holding a banana to his ear may actually be a high-tech terrorist. As most of them should be familiar with the legendary Sesame Street Bert and Ernie banana scenes, I have little doubt they’ll buy it immediately.
Chris S • October 25, 2011 5:21 PM
@lazlo
And is that easily repeatable?
Can you verify my passthing?
Jan Schejbal • October 25, 2011 5:36 PM
No one would be listening in. Or so they thought. Unknown to them, all their communication was being recorded and analyzed using a simple Man-in-the-middle attack, thanks to the stupid fact that they forgot to implement any kind of authentication for the Diffie-Hellman exchange.
pfogg • October 25, 2011 6:56 PM
@Dirk Praet
Wouldn’t that be steganography? An encrypted cell phone…maybe one that opens like a Chinese puzzle-box?
W Ricker • October 25, 2011 7:35 PM
Cryptanalysis on actual historic document succeeds
“Computer Scientist Cracks Mysterious ‘Copiale Cipher'”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111025102320.htm
=> http://stp.lingfil.uu.se/~bea/copiale/
Gabriel • October 25, 2011 8:24 PM
Since we are on the topic of Michael Savage, does anyone know what his take on encryption is? Does he demonize it as a tool to enable drug dealers and terrorists to hide their evil deeds from law enforcement? Or does he understand how it is important for privacy and security?
David • October 25, 2011 9:45 PM
“[A] Twofish algorithm”?
Natanael L • October 26, 2011 5:34 AM
@W Ricker: Isn’t that the one that was thought to be jibberish?
Dave • October 26, 2011 7:26 AM
“No one would be listening in.”
Ah, but if you put the two fish in your ears, everything is translated perfectly.
Dave (again) • October 26, 2011 7:35 AM
@David
“[A] Twofish algorithm”?
Indeed. Surely it should be The Twofish algorithm.
That’s the trouble with putting crypto in a thriller. You have to know what you’re talking about.
Case in point: Digital Fortress by Dan Brown. One or two teensy-weensy mistakes! Although I did enjoy it when hyper-intelligent Susan Fletcher almost fell out of her chair with surprise.
GrammarNazi • October 26, 2011 8:24 AM
Spell check, please.
Stupid Security Questions • October 26, 2011 9:56 AM
@Dave: Digital Fortress was a nice turn-your-brain-off read for me the first time through, but I couldn’t even get past the first few pages when trying to re-read it. Other websites have pointed out all the factual and even logical errors in it so I won’t bother summarizing them but it was just painful.
Love Poems to Ginsberg • October 26, 2011 10:35 AM
He also has a fistfight with a terrorist trying to detonate a nuclear device at the very top of one of the Golden Gate Bridge’s towers. One of the better unintentional comedies since Beck’s “don’t tease the panther” snoozefest.
anonymous coward • October 26, 2011 2:42 PM
It was a dark and stormy night…
Subscribe to comments on this entry
Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.
James Howard • October 25, 2011 1:16 PM
Page from Google Books:
http://books.google.com/books?id=gjLIHnIIbPgC&lpg=PP1&dq=abuse%20of%20power%20savage&pg=PT27#v=onepage&q&f=false