The POUCH

The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random initialization
vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree that such an implementation is highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack.
Hellman and Dilfie rely on knowing the algorithm for their known plain text attacks
An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
programs to learn the algorithm. The POUCH has many roadblocks built in
to prevent this.
I refer to Cummings, Cryptography and Data Security pages 150 and 98 in this regard.
John Holt

JOHN E. HOLT enscribed thusly:
> 
> The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random initialization
> vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree that such an implementation is highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack.
> Hellman and Dilfie rely on knowing the algorithm for their known plain text attacks
> An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
> programs to learn the algorithm. The POUCH has many roadblocks built in
> to prevent this.

	An unpublished algorithm mean that it's worthless snakeoil that
depends on obfuscation until it is successfully reverse engineered (which
you just set yourself up as a prime target) and then all of your chumps
(ahh..  clients) get raped.  I wouldn't even look at it and would advise
all of my clients to avoid it like the plague...

> I refer to Cummings, Cryptography and Data Security pages 150 and 98 in this regard.
> John Holt

-- 
 Michael H. Warfield    |  (770) 985-6132   |  mhw@WittsEnd.com
  (The Mad Wizard)      |  (770) 925-8248   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9      |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471    |  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

"JOHN E. HOLT" writes:
> The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random
> initialization vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree
> that such an implementation is highly resistant to all forms of
> cryptographic attack.

Thats just plain wrong.

Some block ciphers are highly resistant. Some block ciphers crack open
like eggs. Being a "block product cipher" doesn't in any way make you
"highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack".

> An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
> programs to learn the algorithm.

The principle in the modern world of crypto is that your cipher must
be resistant to attack even if the attacker knows all details of it.

Furthermore, the principle in buying crypto is to know that 99% of
crypto on the market is junk, and that if you can't find out how it
works its probably not any good at all.

Perry

On 26 Aug 1996, JOHN E. HOLT wrote:

> The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random initialization
> vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree that such an implementation is highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack.
> Hellman and Dilfie rely on knowing the algorithm for their known plain text attacks
> An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
> programs to learn the algorithm. The POUCH has many roadblocks built in
> to prevent this.
> I refer to Cummings, Cryptography and Data Security pages 150 and 98 in this regard.
> John Holt

Yes fine, but with an untested algorithm how do you propose to provide for
peer review, or do you propose that the authors of "The Pouch" are too
expert to need/require the input of fellow professionals?

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn@schloss.li

> 
> On 26 Aug 1996, JOHN E. HOLT wrote:
> 
> > The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random initialization
> > vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree that such an implementation is highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack.
> > Hellman and Dilfie rely on knowing the algorithm for their known plain text attacks
> > An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
> > programs to learn the algorithm. The POUCH has many roadblocks built in
> > to prevent this.

There's another live one on sci.crypt, about "market leader" Genio USA; some good chuckles there.
Check out http://www.geniousa.com/genio/

Where's that snakeoil FAQ?  Any progress?

JOHN E. HOLT wrote:
> 
> The Pouch uses a 64 x 64 block product cipher, a 1024 bit random initialization
> vector and the CBC technique.  Most experts agree that such an implementation
> is highly resistant to all forms of cryptographic attack.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Wow!  Resistant to those not invented yet - I guess this means one of
two things - the pooch is a OTP, or Mr. Holt has a time machine.

> Hellman and Dilfie rely on knowing the algorithm for their known plain text attacks

> An unpublished algorithm forces them into reverse engineering the computer
> programs to learn the algorithm. The POUCH has many roadblocks built in
> to prevent this.

Wow! (again).  Dongleless protection!  I'm impressed.  Now we don't need
tamper resistant smart cards - we can do it all in software!

Gary
--
pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary@systemics.com>
Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06 
^S
^A^Aoft FAT filesytem is extremely robust, ^Mrarely suffering from^T^T