Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!jack!man!crash!jkimble
From: jkimble@crash.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Published Key/Knappsack Encryption
Message-ID: <1241@crash.CTS.COM>
Date: Tue, 16-Jun-87 18:01:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: crash.1241
Posted: Tue Jun 16 18:01:57 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Jun-87 04:03:37 EDT
Reply-To: jkimble@crash.CTS.COM (Jim Kimble)
Distribution: na
Organization: Crash TS, San Diego, CA
Lines: 34


I've been doing some research for another paper on encryption. Anyway,
while reading up on various "published key" methods, I came across a
few articles about "Knappsack Encryption." The article state
the program is of the published key nature, but was found to be a little
too easy to crack.

I've hacked a program that has been able to work out a few of the 
keys through a brutal front-line attack, but obviously would not be
very effective in the real dog-eat-dog, live on the razor's edge world
of encryption. 

Has anyone ever used or seen this method of encryption? Is it still around?
Was it good? Was it really as easy as the magazine made it sound? 



----ALSO:

I've finally returned from vacation and typed that bibliography of 
encryption sources and references. As soon as I can, I will upload it
here and distribute it.

--Jim Kimble
San Diego State University
Varsity Football, Wide Receiver

"I've always wanted to work in a delicatessen just so some woman would
come up to me and ask for a little tongue." 


UUCP: {akgua, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!jkimble
ARPA: crash!jkimble@nosc
INET: jkimble@crash.CTS.COM