// COMPLETE THREAD

Re: The Halting Problem

3 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child

NODE 21e17704Re: The Halting Problem
>From mab@crypto.com Wed May 12 13:26:04 1993

>I don't see how determining that a particular string is an encrypted
>message reduces to the halting problem. 

Consider that the cyphertext is a program for an abstract machine
called the cyphercracker which returns TRUE if a message is encoded
otherwise FALSE.  Such a system for determining message-ness could
take an arbitrary amount of cpu time and no amount of static 
analysis could determine the return value quicker.


Paul E. Baclace
peb@procase.com
NODE c3bfd922Re: The Halting Problem
>> Consider that the cyphertext is a program for an abstract machine
>> called the cyphercracker which returns TRUE if a message is encoded
>> otherwise FALSE.  Such a system for determining message-ness could
>> take an arbitrary amount of cpu time and no amount of static 
>> analysis could determine the return value quicker.

Nope.  Such a system will take no more than O(2^n) time, where n is
the number of bits in the key.  You can never do worse than
brute-force.  Now, you still might not be able to determine if a
message is encoded, since maybe I was just encoding true random noise
from a radioactive source.  And you might have false positives, too,
esp. with one-time pads.  But it will always halt.  The failure modes
have nothing to do with the halting problem, they have to do with the
fact that is-encoded(message) cannot be formally defined.

		Marc
NODE 772e71fdRe: The Halting Problem
>>From mab@crypto.com Wed May 12 13:26:04 1993
>
>>I don't see how determining that a particular string is an encrypted
>>message reduces to the halting problem. 
>
>Consider that the cyphertext is a program for an abstract machine
>called the cyphercracker which returns TRUE if a message is encoded
>otherwise FALSE.  Such a system for determining message-ness could
>take an arbitrary amount of cpu time and no amount of static 
>analysis could determine the return value quicker.
>
>
>Paul E. Baclace
>peb@procase.com
>
>

Well, that formulation is a bit fuzzy, but I think you've got your reduction
technique backwards.  To reduce something to the halting problem, you
need to show that you could use a machne that solves your problem to solve
halting, not the other way around.

-matt