From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar  3 20:43:12 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6924B16A4CE
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu,  3 Mar 2005 20:43:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (f170.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.170])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAA4C43D49
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu,  3 Mar 2005 20:43:11 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j23KhA08010984;
	Thu, 3 Mar 2005 21:43:10 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:37:24 EST."
             <Pine.NEB.4.62.0503031436160.12890@server.duh.org> 
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:43:10 +0100
Message-ID: <10983.1109882590@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: ALeine <aleine@austrosearch.net>
cc: elric@imrryr.org
cc: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
cc: tech-security@NetBSD.org
cc: ticso@cicely.de
Subject: Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 20:43:12 -0000

In message <Pine.NEB.4.62.0503031436160.12890@server.duh.org>, Todd Vierling writes:
>On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>> At the time where I wrote GBDE, the best that was offered was CGD (and
>> similar) and users (not cryptographers!) didn't trust it
>
>Could you back up this claim, insofar that "users" did not trust cgd?  I
>haven't seen any distrust of cgd -- in fact, I've seen quite a bit of
>welcome acceptace of cgd by both users *and* cryptographers.

Some of the people I talked to were very unhappy about the same key
being used for all sectors on the disk.  Even a small weakness in
the cipher becomes a big hole because of the amount of data this
offers for analysis.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.