[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DES Vulnerable, Why?

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: DES Vulnerable, Why?
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 1994 22:16:49 -0400
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 28 Jul 1994 10:12:40 EDT." <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]


[email protected] says:
> It seems the TLAs (in a weak moment) let slip that DES was getting old and
> creaky and vulnerable.

Thats hardly news. Its so utterly obvious even without specialized
knowledge one could determine it.

> My question: if triple-DES is so damn tough to break, what is wrong with DES?
>  Triple-DES is a trivial variation on DES.

Similarly, finding the factors of the number 15 and of a 1000 bit
number are nearly the same operation -- unless you take time into
consideration. 

Please go off and read Schneier on this subject before posting again
-- I suspect that his discussion of security and key lengths and
multiple encryption is very clear and well written.

Perry

References:
- DES Vulnerable, Why?
  - From: [email protected]

Prev by Date: Re: (fwd) Possible compromise of anon.penet.fi
Next by Date: Re: GUT and NP
Prev by thread: Re: DES Vulnerable, Why?
Next by thread: Re: DES Vulnerable, Why?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread