Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Claas Newsgroups: sci.crypt Subject: Re: Memorizing a 128 bit / 256 bit hex key Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 22:01:19 +0200 Organization: =?UTF-8?b?4oSt8J2UpfCdlKbwnZSj8J2Uo/CdlK/wnZSi8J2UrfCdlLLwnZSr8J2UqA==?= =?UTF-8?b?8J2UsA==?= Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 20:01:19 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="417559"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="uWi4uQdALkj7ETOfPbhNXfz0+Ra/gM5z6/Fa40dJi9U"; X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Finger: tilde.club/~pollux/ Bytes: 2207 Lines: 35 Rich wrote: > Stefan Claas wrote: > > Well, I guess this would then need a program to handle, right? > > Yes, but you also need a program to handle the conversion from dates to > hex and back. Granted, few would suspect that the "date" command was > used to convert the dates back into a 'key'. And in case people are looking at bash's history, for to many date usages, I have a 'del' command in my .bashrc. :-) alias del=">~/.bash_history;history -cw;" > > My Idea is to use no program for that, so that no evidence can be > > found on the device, in case someone is looking at it. > > It could be a generic erasure coding program, and the exact parameters > (block size, amount of redundancy, etc.) are remembered and specified > only when it is run to 'check' the output. Then it would, presumably, > be no more suspicious than the 'date' command itself (other than what > suspicion might be raised by the fact that most OS'es don't ship with > an erasure coder by default). I guess, instead of an erasure program, I will only use date and put the output in my argon2id program, for key generation, which also has the option to overwrite the clipboard. -- Regards Stefan