Re: 512/1024 again: Mounting old serpent encrypted volumes on newer crypto kernels
From: Kasper Dupont (kasperd_at_daimi.au.dk)
Date: 06/06/03
- Next message: Vilmos Soti: "Re: Security question regarding directory and file permissions"
- Previous message: Doug Laidlaw: "Re: Removing hacker's file"
- In reply to: Mike: "Re: 512/1024 again: Mounting old serpent encrypted volumes on newer crypto kernels"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 07:21:59 +0200
Mike wrote:
>
> Boy, it's hard to convince the crypto people that that 512 IV decision
> had serious repercussions.
It is not secure either. (Not that 1024 is much more secure.)
But I'm pretty sure the change was made because the old version
was not compatible with itself. The new version might not be
compatible with the old version, but neither was the old version.
The new version should at least be compatible with itself in all
cases.
-- Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid på usenet. For sending spam use mailto:aaarep@daimi.au.dk for(_=52;_;(_%5)||(_/=5),(_%5)&&(_-=2))putchar(_);
- Next message: Vilmos Soti: "Re: Security question regarding directory and file permissions"
- Previous message: Doug Laidlaw: "Re: Removing hacker's file"
- In reply to: Mike: "Re: 512/1024 again: Mounting old serpent encrypted volumes on newer crypto kernels"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
