Re: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV

[dpkemp@missi.ncsc.mil (David P. Kemp)]

> From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
>
>  I am keeping track of
> messages sent both to the list and to me privately; however, I'd ask
> that folks send their preferences to the list, if at all possible.


I expressed a preference for explicit IV privately simply to avoid
me-too-ism.  But in the interest of open debate, ...

> From: Rob Adams <adams@cisco.com>
> 
> Add me to the list of people supporting an explicit IV only. 
> 
> I agree with Mr. Rogers' comment that we shouldn't mandate what is in
> the IV.  The two drafts I wrote, and I believe Roy's as well, suggest
> using the last block of the previous encryption pass.  This is cheap
> and common.  I only suggested that people use a pseudo-random value
> for the first pass...  Ed said it best when he stated that he'd
> like to see ship what we've been testing for quite some time now.  I
> do not believe we are "changing to" an explicit IV.  I believe, if
> there is a change, it would be to derived IV.  So I vote for sticking
> with explicit IV's.

Me too.

---

• Prev by Date: RE: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV
• Next by Date: RE: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV
• Prev by thread: RE: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV
• Next by thread: Re: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread