pointless semantic dithering

["William Allen Simpson" <bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu>]

Thanks to Charlie Watt for the intelligent message:

> From: Charlie Watt <watt@sware.com>
> I must admit that I do not understand this debate and side with Perry.
> What is this purpose of this group?  I understood it to be the design of
> a layer 3 security protocol for IP v4.  ...
>

No thanks to Hugo and Uri for the pointless dithering:

> From: hugo@watson.ibm.com
> Exactly! This is why you want an authentication function whose security
> is independent of the particular usage/scenario/assumptions.
>

> From: uri@watson.ibm.com
> Some attacks are possible, unless
> length is in certain place and such... I'd ask - what's the rush?
> I personally won't care about speed advantage of precomputed
> MD5 (unless I'm cracking MD5 key, of course :-)...

What universe are you two from?

This is the IP Security WG.  We are talking about Internet protocols
(which include SNMP and DNS).  We have Internet usage/scenario/assumptions.

IP always has a Length which is always in the same place.

We have lots of messages about speed concerns.

Bill.Simpson@um.cc.umich.edu

---

• Prev by Date: Re: keyed-MD5 placement of secret
• Next by Date: pointless semantic dithering
• Prev by thread: MD5 vs. SHA
• Next by thread: pointless semantic dithering
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread