Unfortunately 3DES did not survive said scrutiny in the end...
It absolutely *has* survived scrutiny. I don't know where you're
getting your information. 3DES is being phased out because its 64-bit
block size makes it dicey for modern bulk encryption, and because its
spectacular overdesign
>> My current understanding of the situation is that there are no known
>> effective attacks against Blowfish so long as it's adequately
>> implemented according to the suggested specifications and it's
>> relatively limited block size accounted for, and I naturally tend to
>> gravitate towards te
> On 13-10-2020 16:46, Dieter Frye wrote:
>
>> Now if any of this remains true today, I cannot tell (I did the research
>> a
>> number of years ago so it's possible something changed along the way),
>> but
>> even if not, it would still make sense to me to allow for greater (or
>> better yet, full)
My current understanding of the situation is that there are no known
effective attacks against Blowfish so long as it's adequately
implemented according to the suggested specifications and it's
relatively limited block size accounted for, and I naturally tend to
gravitate towards tested-and-tr
On 13-10-2020 16:46, Dieter Frye wrote:
> Now if any of this remains true today, I cannot tell (I did the research a
> number of years ago so it's possible something changed along the way), but
> even if not, it would still make sense to me to allow for greater (or
> better yet, full) key size to
> On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 03:00, Dieter Frye said:
>
>> I've been using Blowfish on older machines for years now without issue
>> and
>> I always wondered if this is one of those things that could possibly
>> benefit from an update.
>
> Nope. I used Blowfish back then because it was the only free and
On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 03:00, Dieter Frye said:
> I've been using Blowfish on older machines for years now without issue and
> I always wondered if this is one of those things that could possibly
> benefit from an update.
Nope. I used Blowfish back then because it was the only free and modern
algor
>> What's the rationale behind not going full 448 or at least 256 like
>> AES and Twofish?
>
> Age. At the time Blowfish was adopted there were literally no 256-bit
> ciphers in the RFC2440 suite. Symmetric ciphers were all 128-bit
> (except arguably for 3DES, where the size is wonky[*]). The fi
What's the rationale behind not going full 448 or at least 256 like
AES and Twofish?
Age. At the time Blowfish was adopted there were literally no 256-bit
ciphers in the RFC2440 suite. Symmetric ciphers were all 128-bit
(except arguably for 3DES, where the size is wonky[*]). The first
256-bit
What's the rationale behind not going full 448 or at least 256 like AES
and Twofish?
Best regards.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
10 matches
Mail list logo
