Re: Simple DES question
From: Janis (janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com)
Date: 03/10/03
- Next message: Lassi Hippeläinen: "Re: :::Small AES question:::"
- Previous message: Volker Hetzer: "Re: :::Small AES question:::"
- In reply to: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Next in thread: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Reply: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com (Janis) Date: 10 Mar 2003 06:14:09 -0800
"Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<mGDaa.4249$5G1.1197218877@twister2.starband.net>...
> "adam" <no@email.com> wrote
> > I've read about DES in both Applied Cryptography and Handbook of Applied
> > Cryptography, including the official DES specification, but neither of
> them
> > say if b1 is the MSB or LSB. Sometimes it feels like they mean b1 = bit 0,
> > other times it seems like they mean b1 = bit 63. Which is it?
>
> It was ambiguous in the original DES spec, and some people
> implemented either way. Most people do it as described in
> Gregory's response.
It's now 10+ years to see and implement the standard. But from my
fainting memories I think to remember, that the "only" ambiguity
was with the interpretation of the S-boxes: the switch from a 4 bit
sequence to a 4-bit integer and from a 6-bit integer to the 6 bit
sequence. The rest of the DES FIPS specification seemed to me to
be consistent, either way.
The S-box interpretation ambiguity can be solved by checking the
example in the corresponding DIN/ISO standard. The FIPS standard
had none, IIRC.
-- Janis
- Next message: Lassi Hippeläinen: "Re: :::Small AES question:::"
- Previous message: Volker Hetzer: "Re: :::Small AES question:::"
- In reply to: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Next in thread: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Reply: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Simple DES question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|