On 12/14/2010 6:37 PM, Faramir wrote: > Well, somebody could think "if they made a 256 bits symmetric algo, > there should be a reason for that. And since if the asymmetric key is > broken, the message is decrypted, no matter how strong is the symmetric > algo, then it makes sense to use something equally strong".
Sure. But someone could also think, "since they make both high proof whiskey and fast cars, and they're each perfectly safe, there's no harm in mixing them." Thinking, "if they make a 256-bit symmetric algo, there should be a reason for that," is quite correct as far as it goes. Thinking its existence means you need to use it, though, is not. :)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
