Feeds

Crypto shocker: 'Perfect cipher' dates back to telegraphs

35 years prior to being invented

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

A computer scientist has unearthed evidence that a theoretically unbreakable form of cryptography was in use by telegraph operators as early as 1882, 35 years before its supposed invention by a duo from Bell Labs and the US Army.

The one-time pad, which is also known as the perfect cipher, uses a random key that is shared by both sender and receiver to encrypt and decode a sensitive message. Assuming the key is used only once and both parties securely dispose of it, the technique is the only known method to perform mathematically unbreakable encryption, according to this post by cryptography historian Dirk Rijmenants. Until now its invention was dated to 1917 and credited to Gilbert Vernam of Bell Labs and Captain Joseph Mauborgne of the Army Signal Corps.

But according to The New York Times, computer scientist Steven Bellovin recently found a description of the one-time pad algorithm in an 1882 telegraphers' codebook titled Telegraphic Code to Insure Privacy and Secrecy in the Transmission of Telegrams. It was written by one Frank Miller, a successful banker from California who went on to become a trustee of Stanford University. He also served in the US Army's inspector general's office, where he worked on a team investigating the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

"A banker in the West should prepare a list of irregular numbers to be called 'shift numbers,'" Miller wrote. "The difference between such numbers must not be regular. When a shift-number has been applied, or used, it must be erased from the list and not be used again."

The NYT said independent specialists in cryptography have confirmed that Miller's work proves he developed the one-time pad long before its discovery and later patenting by Vernam and Mauborgne.

“Miller probably invented the one-time pad, but without knowing why it was perfectly secure or even that it was,” David Kahn, the author of the 1967 book The Codebreakers, was quoted as saying. “Moreover, unlike Mauborgne’s conscious invention, or the Germans’ conscious adoption of the one-time pad to superencipher their Foreign Office codes, it had no echo, no use in cryptology. It sank without a trace — until Steve found it by accident.”

A PDF of Bellovin's writeup in the July issue of the journal Cryptologia is here. ®

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
SMASH the Bash bug! Apple and Red Hat scramble for patch batches
'Applying multiple security updates is extremely difficult'
Shellshock: 'Larger scale attack' on its way, warn securo-bods
Not just web servers under threat - though TENS of THOUSANDS have been hit
Apple's new iPhone 6 vulnerable to last year's TouchID fingerprint hack
But unsophisticated thieves need not attempt this trick
Hackers thrash Bash Shellshock bug: World races to cover hole
Update your gear now to avoid early attacks hitting the web
Oracle SHELLSHOCKER - data titan lists unpatchables
Database kingpin lists 32 products that can't be patched (yet) as GNU fixes second vuln
Who.is does the Harlem Shake
Blame it on LOLing XSS terroristas
Researchers tell black hats: 'YOU'RE SOOO PREDICTABLE'
Want to register that domain? We're way ahead of you.
Stunned by Shellshock Bash bug? Patch all you can – or be punished
UK data watchdog rolls up its sleeves, polishes truncheon
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.