Proof that OTP is a perfect cipher

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bipolarity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Bipolarity
Messages
773
Reaction score
2
I'm trying to understand the proof that the OTP is a perfect cipher.
I tried to understand the proof shown in http://web.mit.edu/6.857/OldStuff/Fall97/lectures/lecture2.pdf but I don't understand the part C = y and K = (x XOR y).

Could someone assist me in understanding the proof?

Thanks!

BiP
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like that's a statement about the behavior of bits and the exclusive-or operation. Write your question in the form of a question about arithmetic operations on single bits.
 
The definition of a perfect cipher:

P(m*=M | E_{k}(M) = c) = P(m*=M)

where m* is the interceptor's guess at the message and M is the original plaintext message. k is the key used in the encryption, c is the ciphertext, and E is the encryption algorithm, in this case the XOR operator.

Simplifying, we get

P(m*=M | M \oplus k = c) = P(m*=M)

\frac{P(m*=M \bigcap M \oplus k = c)}{P(M \oplus k = c)} = P(m*=M)

I have trouble figuring out the probability of m*=M \bigcap M \oplus k = c and M \oplus k = c.
 
As I understand the question.

M = the message bit
C = the corresponding bit of the cypher text
K = the corresponding bit of the key

Question: If M = x, why is the event C = y equivalent to the event K = x \oplus y?

The cypher bit is formed by C = M \oplus K

MKC
0 0 0
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 0

For example, If M = 1 then C = 1 exactly when K = 1 \oplus 1 = 0
 
Thank you!

BiP
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top