MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994036294 · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2014.050533

Solving for the RC4 stream cipher state register using a genetic algorithm

2014· article· en· W1994036294 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRC4Stream cipherKeystreamAlgorithmCryptanalysisPermutation (music)Transposition cipherCipherEncryptionGenetic algorithmRunning key cipherCryptographyTheoretical computer scienceComputer securityMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The RC4 stream cipher has shown to be quite resilient to cryptanalysis for the 26 years it has been around. The algorithm is still one of the most widely used methods of encryption over the Internet today being implemented through the Secure Socket Layer and Transport Layer Security protocols. Genetic algorithms are a sub-class of evolutionary algorithms that have been used to help solve many different problems of optimization in a variety of disciplines. In this paper we will examine the abilities of the genetic algorithm as a tool to help solve the permutation that is stored as the state register of the RC4 stream cipher. Finally, we will show that on average the genetic algorithm can solve 100% of the keystream in 2121:5 generations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it