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

Re: user-to-user vs. host-to-host keying

To: atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil
Subject: Re: user-to-user vs. host-to-host keying
From: Phil Karn <karn@unix.ka9q.ampr.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 13:54:32 -0800
Cc: Danny.Nessett@eng.sun.com, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: <199503081901.AA04753@interlock.ans.net> (message from Ran Atkinson on Wed, 8 Mar 1995 14:00:25 -0500)

>  Your analysis was limited to DES.  The specifications are
>algorithm-independent and NEED to support other algorithms
>such as RCx, IDEA, etc.  The need for user-to-user keying

Actually, the analysis that resulted in the 2^32 block limitation would
seem to apply to any block cipher with a 64-bit block, regardless of
key length.

2^32 blocks is a lot of data, the weakness is rather academic, and it's
so easy to rekey that I'm not going to lose any sleep over this one.

Phil

References:

Re: user-to-user vs. host-to-host keying

From: Ran Atkinson <rja@bodhi.itd.nrl.navy.mil>

Prev by Date: Re: (IPng) Re: Proposed message on perfect forward security
Next by Date: I-D ACTION:draft-metzger-esp-01.txt
Prev by thread: Re: user-to-user vs. host-to-host keying
Next by thread: user-to-user vs. host-to-host keying
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread