<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

Subject: Re: IDEA (and another query)
From: "Eric M. Hopper" <hopper,AT,omnifarious,DOT,org>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 03:13:00 +0200
In-reply-to: <OFA23C1FE8.FE2A719A-ONC1256CFB.0055C8B5@franke.com>

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 14:32, Olaf Titz wrote:
> > Does anyone know what Olaf thinks ?
> 
> Yes ;-)
> 
> > > We don't need IDEA. I think 3DES would be a much better choice.
> 
> I think 3DES would be a rather poor choice because of its *ahem*
> performance characteristics. Much more interesting would be support
> for pluggable algorithms via the Linux 2.5 standard crypto API, so you
> could have Rijndael, MARS or whatever you like.

I agree about 3DES's performance characteristics.  :-)

> - use of real cryptographic checksum instead of CRC
> - version flags and key-use flag in a proper packet header

One problem with real cryptographic checksums is that the tend to be
expensive to compute.  It's sad that all the good modes for combining
verification and cryptography are patented.  :-(

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: pgp00002.pgp
Description: "This is a digitally signed message part"


<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]