# Csec 630 1

1240 Words5 Pages
Q1. Which tool or technique from the above list would be most effective for a cryptanalyst to use to decipher a text encrypted with the Caesar cipher, and why? I personal like all the ways that I saw in the above list. I think that a cryptanalyst would likely to use the Histogram. I personally think it is easier to read and the information that it gives is very valuable. It gives you the frequency and percent on how many times a certain character was used. Which if I think if I was a cryptanalyst this may help me out in deciphering the encrypted text. Q2. What do you notice about the histogram results when text is encrypted with the Vigenère cipher in comparison to the results of the Caesar cipher? Why is this the case? I…show more content…
Q6. What difference do you notice in the block size, discuss whether or not this cipher would be susceptible to statistical analysis and why? I can see the difference of the block size and it is advent that one may be more susceptible to statistical analysis than the other. I think when you use the smaller key it is more susceptible to statistical analysis and if you use the larger one it isn’t or a lot more difficult to be able to get statistical data on it and here is why. If you look at p and q with the smaller values you can see the the block size is reduced while the amount of blocks or the number is increased. When we compare the other p and q with the larger values we can see that the block size is increased and the number of blocked is decreased. Q7. Analyze the data encrypted with the RSA cipher. How does this encryption method compare to the other methods the Lab has covered? I actually use this type of encryption for work. I have an RSA device on my computer as well as on my key ring. What I have noticed is that histogram seems to be a little bit more difficult to decipher as well as the entropy. When I look at my result it seems to be random and very made up. It doesn’t hold to a pattern and very hard to crack. So I think it is fair to say that it would be almost impossible to be susceptible to statistical analysis by