full-disclosure - My response to both the analysis of CIPE by Gutmann, Slashdot and the response by the CIPE list

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: <20030925120725.C2378@dekadens.coredump.cx>
From: lcamtuf at ghettot.org (Michal Zalewski)
Subject: My response to both the analysis of CIPE by
 Gutmann, Slashdot and the response by the CIPE list

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Florian Weimer wrote:

> Especially as some of the flaws (the replay attacks) are actually
> documented in the manual.

And correct me if I am wrong, but it appears to me that replay attacks are
not that much of a concern when encrypting TCP/IP packets?

-- 
------------------------- bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --
 Michal Zalewski * [http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx]
    Did you know that clones never use mirrors?
--------------------------- 2003-09-25 12:07 --

   http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/photo/current/