Re: IDEA

["Eric M. Hopper" <hopper,AT,omnifarious,DOT,org>]

On Thu, 2003-04-03 at 12:27, Ken Seefried wrote:
> Eric M. Hopper writes:
> > 
> > I, personally, could care less about idea.  I would greatly appreciate
> > Rijndael support.  Though, I've heard rumors of a Rijndael attack that
> > halves the effective key length, so I'd prefer you implement the 256 bit
> > variant of Rijndael.  :-) 
> > 
> 
> While during the AES competetion there was some interesting work done to 
> reduced-round variants of Rijndael (for example, 
> http://www.counterpane.com/rijndael.html), I believe that most of the 
> "rumoured" attacks against Rijndeal derrive from a paper by Courtois & 
> Pieprzyk (on the somewhat overwrought 
> http://www.minrank.org/~courtois/myresearch.html). 
> 
> This paper seems to have been fairly well debunked within the crypto 
> community (see for example http://www.usdsi.com/aes.html, 
> 
>https://www.cosic.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/nessie/reports/phase2/Xslbes8_Ness.pdf
> , and postings to sci.crypt).  At best (worst?), it appears that XLS is a 
> truely novel and interesting technique for which there is no basis to claim 
>
> that it will result in a practical attack against real cyphers. 

I did a little research myself, and that's the only attack I could find
on the net.  So, the rumors I heard were greatly exaggerated.  :-)

So AES with the 128 bit variant is probably enough.  I would like the
256 bit variant available though.

In research I did about 9 months ago, the fastest implementations were
proprietary.  There were some pretty decent free implementations though.

Have fun (if at all possible),
-- 
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they
be properly armed.  -- Alexander Hamilton
-- Eric Hopper (hopper,AT,omnifarious,DOT,org  
http://www.omnifarious.org/~hopper) 
--

Attachment: pgp00001.pgp
Description: "This is a digitally signed message part"