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

Re: MD4-derived hash functions

To: [email protected] (David A Wagner)
Subject: Re: MD4-derived hash functions
From: Mark <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 13:53:05 +1000 (EET)
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "David A Wagner" at Oct 28, 95 08:28:11 pm
Sender: [email protected]

>The conclusion to take away from this is simple: double encryption
>doesn't give you much extra security over single encryption.  Don't
>use double encryption.

That doesnt make sense. If one accepts that double encryption is securer than
single encryption, wether marginally or twice as secure, why not use it?

I would rather stand behind a steel door and a wooden door than a steel door
alone if anyone was shooting rounds at me.

Cheers,
Mark
[email protected]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: MD4-derived hash functions
  - From: Childers James <[email protected]>
- Re: MD4-derived hash functions
  - From: Simon Spero <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: MD4-derived hash functions
  - From: [email protected] (David A Wagner)

Prev by Date: Re: newsweek oct 30 Levy digital cash article
Next by Date: Re: MD4-derived hash functions
Prev by thread: Re: MD4-derived hash functions
Next by thread: Re: MD4-derived hash functions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread