full-disclosure - RE: Rijndael

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0304201057420.138785120@somehost.domainz.com>
From: devon at lithiumnode.com (Timmah)
Subject: RE: Rijndael

> > > Yes, it was, Belgian or Indian, I think.  I didn't mention it becuse I
> > > couldn't remember how to spell it ;)
> > >
> > > But since it's now the US's AES standard, who knows how strong it is...
> >
> > The designers are Belgian (Flemish).  Not to denigrate them or their work,
> > I believe that it was not the strongest of the five AES finalists, and
> > this was demonstrated during the last few months before selection.  You
> > can interpret that however you want.
> >
> There were other factors in the selection process, not just cryptographic
> strength. And some weaknesses have been fixed later.

I maintain that the AES selection committee didn't weight factors sanely.
Overall security of algorithms in different modes of operation should have
been a deal-breaking factor and it was instead sacrificed for speed and
other considerations.  That is just a fact.

Perhaps you're privy to some updates to the cipher specification that I'm
not, but I'm pretty sure that the algorithm's structure and operations
haven't changed at all since it's submission.  What weaknesses are you
referring to having been fixed?

[t]