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

RE: Two AES encryption modes?



If everyone wants to use the IETF-specified ones that will be great, but in
the past it has been hard to get consensus on one ciphersuite that everyone
can agree on. I don't relish leaving this up to a tyrany of the majority.
There are always things that people want to make optional, such as IPCOMP or
PFS.

The bits on the wire issue is a red herring, unless you are also advocating
using group 1 and preshared keys to save bandwidth.

You are free to implement as few or as many ciphersuites as you want. I
imagine you'd be considered compliant as long as you implement the
WG-sanctioned ones. If another WG tries to standardize AES-256/MD2 it will
never survive last call. And as I've said before, I don't buy your
complaints about testing.

Andrew
-------------------------------------------
There are no rules, only regulations. Luckily,
history has shown that with time, hard work,
and lots of love, anyone can be a technocrat.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
> [mailto:owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com]On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 6:32 PM
> To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
> Subject: Re: Two AES encryption modes?
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>
> >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Krywaniuk
> <andrew.krywaniuk@alcatel.com> writes:
>     Andrew> Not necessarily. Take a look at the list I sent earlier:
>
>     Andrew>    IETF-ipsec high security '02  (chosen by WG,
> published in an RFC)
>     Andrew>    US DoD FIPS standard '02   (chosen by a large
> customer, listed as a
>     Andrew> requirement)
>     Andrew>    VPNC default '02   (chosen by a vendor
> consortium, published on their
>     Andrew> website)
>     Andrew>    JoeBillyBob JBB's ciphersuite '02  (chosen by
> an individual, distributed
>     Andrew> to his friends)
>
>     Andrew> Only the first ciphersuite needs to be published
> in an RFC. The other ones
>     Andrew> are published on the DoD, VPNC, and
> joebillybob.com websites/technical
>     Andrew> publications respectively. If you use GUI
> ciphersuites there is no IANA
>     Andrew> registry, so there doesn't need to be a
> comprehensive list of all the
>     Andrew> possible ciphersuites.
>
>   There will nothing to help interoperability.
>   It certainly won't help anyone get good support from
> hardware vendors.
>
>   We are just wasting bits on EVERY wire to avoid writing what will be
> perhaps a dozen real drafts.
>
>   After the first 6 or so submissions of AES-256/MD2 (not
> even HMAC), people
> will get bored with the concept. The only GUI ciphersuites
> used will be the
> IETF specified ones, and we'll have hundreds of lines of code
> in SOI that
> never get tested, except when Tero Kivinen initiates to the
> broadcast address
> at bakeoffs.
>
> ]    Internet Security. Have encryption, will travel
>  |1 Fish/2 Fish [
> ]  Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON
>  |Red F./Blow F [
> ]mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca
> http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |strong crypto [
> ]    At the far end of some dark fiber - wait that's dirt!
>  |for everyone  [
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3ia
> Charset: latin1
> Comment: Finger me for keys
>
> iQCVAwUBPUHNyoqHRg3pndX9AQHMTwQA7l9UUAbyhdgOFrbE31XCTrb/K49D2KPE
> uTT/YTktx8WXgs3ZJiZqcQcsanl9b7NeUQB0pWqOzzvcadUOa/1XHp0FrHD9XU1V
> 3OUg9Ww96qP6kGMznlAI6TQQpzgm12O4biNWWLQXNXMIXaLwsbeNcP8fzjEjIg9+
> 0qOp83ZRU8Q=
> =ilr+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>