Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk
From: Joe Peschel (jpeschel_at_no.spam.org)
Date: 04/29/04
- Next message: Michael Amling: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Next in thread: William Wallace: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:14:34 -0000
Tom St Denis <tom@securescience.net> wrote in
news:1d4kc.316703$2oI1.158163@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:
> William Wallace wrote:
>> Tom St Denis <tom@securescience.net> wrote in message
>> news:<IEGjc.303741$2oI1.167578@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com
>> >...
>>
>>>So far you don't have a track record here or anywhere else for all I
>>>know [and think about it, the rest of the group knows as much about
>>>you as I do].
>>
>>
>> The idea I brought up stands on its own, as all ideas do. I don't
>> even claim to have invented the idea (designing an algorithm robust
>> to implementation errors). If others on sci.crypt only wish to
>> consider ideas from people they have heard of, that is there
>> business. But I have the feeling that not everybody on sci.crypt
>> thinks like you.
>
> The concept of a "robust" design is not new. The Twofish design for
> example is very thorough. Similarly other algorithms such as RC5 and
> RC6 are very elegantly described and trivial to get right.
>
> This is why I don't get why you think your idea is new or so important
> such that people should change the Blowfish specification to bend to
> your whim. Using XOR is not a good idea. It's not what was intended.
> Case closed.
>
>>>So you come here, proclaim a non-fix to a problem as "the only way
>>>to solve the problem" and then get all hostile when people tell
>>>you otherwise.
>>
>>
>> Good lord. Now why did you put quotes there? I didn't write that,
>> or anything like that. You challenge my credibility (when I am not
>> asking you or anybody to believe anything--this all started with a
>> thought for discussion)--then you lie by putting quotes around that
>> sentence.
>
> I didn't say you said that. I put that in quotes to capture the
> essence of the thread.
No. When you put that phrase within quotation marks it looks as if you are
quoting William, especially in the way you introduce the quoted material.
J
-- __________________________________________ When will Bush come to his senses? Joe Peschel D.O.E. SysWorks http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm __________________________________________
- Next message: Michael Amling: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Next in thread: William Wallace: "Re: Blowfish Sign Extension implementation risk"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|