Initial thinking would be not unless the protocol revealed sensitive local information that could then be analysed by an ML algorithm and applied globally.  local meaning I see messages from Alice and Bob extract some information x, then apply x to all other users.  Not an expert in ML, this was just initial thoughts.
80134
I am about to go study for my masters in machine learning, data mining and high performance computing, but have recently become very interested in cryptography after taking Dan Boneh's Cryptography course on coursera.com.   I was wondering if there are any practical applications for machine learning in cryptography? A quick google search didn't seem to reveal much for me so i was wondering if someone here knows something.  My first impression would be that machine learning techniques could be used to learn the inverse function for some cipher and passphrase given enough plaintext/ciphertext pairs, but i am not sure how capable things like neural networks are at learning functions which are not linearly separable.
65113
I've noticed that emails are not protected in the user description. For example  entered his email and when viewing the source code of the page it is plain text that malicious bots could harvest and exploit to spam. It would be nice if email addresses were automatically encoded to prevent this.
76488
I have heard/read the term but don't quite understand what it means.  When should I use this technique and how would I use it? Can anyone provide a good code sample?
94634
I will begin with a disclaimer, I am not an English native speaker, but I can speak fluent English and understand English in almost all research papers I read.   However, occasionally I come across some papers published in peer reviewed journals  with ridiculously complicated sentence structure using relic non-technical vocabulary that no one in the past century has heard of!   Here is one of my favorites:     The algorithm fathoms in a synergetic manner globally, and an antagonistic depth quest locally.   Whatever that means!  Don't get me wrong, the content of such papers can sometimes be informative, but I can't help but get frustrated over such over complication in language! I can spend days trying to decipher what the author was trying to convey and I occasionally give up on the entire paper.  So my question is, why do authors feel the need to hide their amazing ideas/contributions behind such language barrier? Would it hurt to write the paper in a simple fashion such that any reader with the required technical background can understand it?      auth'rs, wherefore thee doth this?
109757
There have been strict laws about the export of crypto software to certain countries. I can understand the intent, but never gauged the fact that there is nothing stopping these countries from developing their own crypto software. So why limit the export?   And in light of the recent NSA revelations, of backdoors being engineered into crypto algos, wouldn't the export of such compromised algorithms have helped to unravel secrets?
73954
What is the "Random Oracle Model"?  Is it an "assumption" akin to the hardness of factoring and discrete log?  Or something else?  And why do some researchers have a strong distrust of this model?
36167
I am considering a system where a small device accepts messages/commands from another device over a wireless channel.  I am worried about replay attacks.  The messages will be encrypted.  What are well-vetted schemes for protection against these attacks?  I am not too keen on timestamps (as described in ) as I don't really want to have to keep clocks synchronised.  I am currently thinking of using HMAC but want to be sure that I'm doing the right thing.
1065
I just learned that using CBC encryption with an IV which is predictable is not secure.  From what I understand, using certain plain texts, and then guessing the IV that it uses, the attacker can verify if the IV he guessed was right. How does this qualify as an attack?
46470
I quote Bobby's question here since I encountered the same one...    Consider the following protocol for two parties to flip a fair coin.   Trusted party $T$ publishes her public key $K_{pub}$ $A$ chooses a random bit $b_A$, encrypts it under $K_{pub}$, and announces the ciphertext $c_A$ to $B$ and $T$ $B$ does the same and announces a ciphertext $c_B$ (where $c_B \neq c_A$) $T$ decrypts $c_A$ and $c_B$, and announces the results. Both parties $XOR$ the results to obtain the random value $b_A\oplus b_B$.   It was shown that  was not appropriate for the encryption scheme.  seems to fail to work also. Since $c_A=m^e \mod N$. Then if $m=1$, $c=1$. If $B$ receives $A$'s cipher he will know the exact value of $m$.   So what should the appropriate encryption scheme be?
27097
Why is insulting other users and giving sarcastic comments such a huge part of the culture on SO? It's the complete opposite of projects like Wikipedia where everybody is exceedingly friendly and helpful.  For example: This response comes from a user with 13k reputation to a question about an interview problem:     There are a fair number of undergraduate CS students who can see this solution       immediately, and it seems they were looking for those students.      If you have any ambition as a C++ programmer, and aren't already intimately       familiar with the data structures and algorithms provided by the STL, you       should learn them now. It seems your competition already has.   This was in response to a genuinely extremely difficult interview problem that did not even ask for a solution using the STL. This seems to me like an unnecessarily unfriendly thing to say. This is just one example of what I think is a major trend.
10984
The question of whether P=NP is perhaps the most famous in all of Computer Science. What does it mean? And why is it so interesting?  Oh, and for extra credit, please post a proof of the statement's truth or falsehood. :)
113298
Alice has a message, generates a one time pad, encrypts her message and sends it to Bob. Bob generates his own one time pad, encrypts the message again, and sends it back to Alice. Alice then decrypts this message using her one time pad, sends it back to Bob who then decrypts it the last time using his one time pad.  The only problems I see with this technique:   It is vulnerable to a man in the middle attack. It requires sending the message back and forth twice between sender and recipient. It doesn't scale well if you want to use it to communicate with multiple people. Requires a way of generating cryptographically secure random numbers.   Does this method of encryption have a name?  If we ignore the fact that it's vulnerable to a man in the middle attack, is this method of encryption information-theoretically secure?  Why isn't this method used widely, i.e. which of the above listed problems or other problems makes this method infeasible for production use?
664
Someone mentioned it in the IRC as the slicing problem.
94659
Someone seems to be playing with the Stackexchange Hot Question algorithm:    This question seems to be the coordinated work of about a dozen entirely new users (created today) to post a "question" that gets a high "hotness" score.  I don't know any Chinese and Google Translate is imperfect, but it seems to be entirely content-free (having only meta-content) and should only exist on their meta site (if there is a reason for it to exist at all).  The fact that all participating users seem to be entirely new and are up-voting is rather strange as well (and borders on cheating, in my book).
61870
I have created an encryption algorithm for this app I am currently in the process of developing. I was wondering if my code looks "sharp", concise, and most importantly, succinct. I was also wondering if it is secure.   I know that 99% of the time, encryption algorithms that are invented are not secure, however I was wondering if this algorithm is in the 1% of the safe ones.  #Key Size: 128 bytes [recommended]  import random import os import time import hashlib  def generate_key(key_size):     key = os.urandom(key_size)     return key;  def encrypt(_key, message):     letter_ascii = []     letter_ascii_final = []     ascii_key_value = ''.join(str(ord(x)) for x in str(_key))     for letter in message:         letter_ascii.append(ord(letter))     for _letter in letter_ascii:         added = int(ascii_key_value) + int(_letter)         letter_ascii_final.append(str(added))     return letter_ascii_final;  def decrypt(_key, message):     message_repieced = []     ascii_key_value = ''.join(str(ord(x)) for x in str(_key))     for item in message:         _item = chr(int(item)-int(ascii_key_value))         message_repieced.append(str(_item))     return ''.join(message_repieced);
82390
I have keypair (u,r), and two pieces of data, X and Y.  I reveal X publicly but keep Y secret. Y has high entropy.  I then concatenate X and Y, into Z.  I encrypt Z, into "encrypt(Z,u) = Q". r is needed to decrypt Q back into Z.  Later, (when it doesn't matter), r will be revealed and everyone will decrypt Q into Z. At that point, everyone will know that, all along, Q "contained" X. Can I prove that Q contains X before r is revealed (including interactive zero-knowledge proofs)?
124246
I am trying to make a taxonomy of the different purposes of some cryptographic protocols. Generally speaking, the purpose of PIR, oblivious transfer and differential privacy--it sounds as if they were invented for the same purpose: "Give me the information I want without learning anything about this information".   Can we make the aforementioned generalization?