Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

RE: RE: RE: Rubix

by BlaisePascal (Monk)
on Oct 03, 2000 at 00:28 UTC ( #34977=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RE: RE: Rubix
in thread Rubix

Yes, that notation is more common, but the problem is that it doesn't scale well for NxNxN cubes. It fixes the centers for 3x3x3 cubes, and it doesn't handle the inner slices for 4x4x4 or higher order cubes. The notation I described was reasonably compact, and handled cubes up to 9x9x9. That's why I went with it.

The security really gets worse the larger the cube -- mainly because of key-length. True, the total number of permutations goes up exponentially (and how! one -factor- in the number of permutations is 24!floor((N-1)/2). I don't have time to compute the other factors, but with that exponential base, who cares?), but the number of permutations that can be reached within m quarter-turns is less than 12Nm. If you want to reach anywhere near a decent subset of the permutations, you are going to quickly need huge keys. If you use too small of keys, you get too little mixing, which ruins your cipher. I'd be interested to know when the length of good keys exceeds the length of the datablock (6N2). I suspect it happens quite low -- I know 3x3x3 cubes require at least 22 quarter-turns to reach all permutations, with a datablock size of 24 characters.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://34977]
help
Chatterbox?
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (7)
As of 2018-07-20 20:42 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    It has been suggested to rename Perl 6 in order to boost its marketing potential. Which name would you prefer?















    Results (441 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?