On Mar 8, 2006, at 3:47 PM, Matt Ball wrote:
Propose that bullet 3 in section 4.1 be reworded to: 4.1=20
"Plaintext P
shall have a length from 1 to 2^36-32 bytes".
I removed the 'record' language from this statement.
(Again, if we're supported 'authenticate-only', we need to
support =20
Title: RE: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
Ok, I see. Yes, I was wrong
in my previous email. The length is indeed a byte count, not a block count. It
has been a few years since I looked at CCM in detail!
I think that you understand
it correctly. So we are in fact
may not be allowed.
Thanks!
-Matt
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Whiting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 5:14 PM
> To: Matt Ball; james hughes
> Cc: Garry McCracken; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
>
application, L=3 is probably about
right.
Does this help?
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Ball [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 3:48 PM
> To: james hughes
> Cc: Garry McCracken; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Doug Whiting
> Subject: RE: IEEE 1619.
(Doug Whiting, there's a CCM question for you below...)
Hi Jim,
See comments below:
> >> Propose that bullet 3 in section 3.1 be reworded to: 3.1
> "Plaintext P
> >> shall have a length from 1 to 2^24"
> >
> > It might be better to not impose any limit, but rather let the
> > particular
> > a
.
Garry
-Original Message-
From: Matt Ball [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 6:12 PM
To: Garry McCracken; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
Hi Garry,
I've got a couple comments for the suggested changes you sent out
ea
the spec as well.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Glen Jaquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 6:47 PM
To: Matt Ball
Cc: stds-p1619@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
Matt,
You wrote:
DriveKey = SHA-256(0x01 || 0x
On Mar 7, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Matt Ball wrote:
Propose that bullet 3 in section 3.1 be reworded to: 3.1 "Plaintext P
shall have a length from 1 to 2^24"
It might be better to not impose any limit, but rather let the
particular
application define a limit. 16 MB is a customary limit in SCSI ta
ken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc
Subject
RE: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
(Please read this message carefully, because it might change or break
current implementations...)
Thanks Garry for following up!
Is there anything else that
Hi Garry,
I've got a couple comments for the suggested changes you sent out earlier:
> All, below are some comments and feedback on IEEE 1619.1
> draft 4 (tape):
>
> Encryption blocks need not correspond to media records:
> The standard should not constrain the location or technology used for
>
> Is there anything else that we should change in the latest
> 1619.1 document?
> I'll go ahead and add these changes in, then add the new
> stuff, including the following:
>
> - Method for key derivation using SP800-90 DEC 2005 draft.
> - Requirements of entropy in IV if key derivation is not
pdf>
Thanks,
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garry
McCracken
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 12:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Garry McCracken
Subject: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
Below is a retransmission of my
-Original Message-
From: Garry McCracken
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 12:57 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: Garry McCracken
Subject: IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape) Comments and feedback
All, below are some comments and feedback on IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape):
Encryption block
All, below are some comments and feedback on IEEE 1619.1 draft 4 (tape):
Encryption blocks need not correspond to media records:
The standard should not constrain the location or technology used for
the encryption. It should support hardware or software based solutions,
and it should support encr
14 matches
Mail list logo
