Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis
From: Tom St Denis (tomstdenis_at_iahu.ca)
Date: 05/19/03
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- In reply to: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 20:59:16 GMT
Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:
> Tom St Denis wrote:
>
>> The fact that Skipjack has 32 rounds does not make it elegant though.
>> By comparison RC5 with 16 rounds is not only faster, smaller and IMHO
>> more elegant its also just as secure [more if you have a bigger key
>> which is possible in RC5 not Skipjack].
>
>
> David Wagner didn't say that it was the 32 rounds that made
> it elegant.
> And how do you come to the conclusion that RC5 is "just as
> secure"? Are you the first in the non-Black world to develop
> a correct and comprehensive theory of cryptosystem security?
> Why haven't you published this?
Secure this!
[picture of a$$ deleted]
Normally when someone says secure they mean secure from known cryptanalysis.
And as far as anyone has published RC5 with 16 rounds is not vulnerable
to any attacks [short of weak keys].
Tom
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- In reply to: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: "Alien" cryptanalysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|