From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar  4 07:39:48 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 70E2016A4CE
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  4 Mar 2005 07:39:48 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (f170.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.170])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FFE043D39
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  4 Mar 2005 07:39:47 +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 j247dVcL014891;
	Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:39:32 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Mar 2005 19:45:53 EST."
             <87bra0grwe.fsf@snark.piermont.com> 
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:39:31 +0100
Message-ID: <14890.1109921971@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: ALeine <aleine@austrosearch.net>
cc: tech-security@NetBSD.org
cc: elric@imrryr.org
cc: hackers@freebsd.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: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 07:39:48 -0000

In message <87bra0grwe.fsf@snark.piermont.com>, "Perry E. Metzger" writes:

>My strong suggestion for you is that you adopt a similar approach --
>build a good framework that, given good algorithms, will provide
>security, and make it easy for users to change over if an algorithm
>falls.

If you actually look at GBDE, you will see that any and all of the
algorithms can be changed.  They are used only in their most basic
capability.  This was part of the design from the start: not to
rely on any single-source algorithm.

>Well, so is stock AES 256. I don't see why I should assume your
>construction is any better. What do you know that the NIST/NSA review
>of AES did not know?

That neither the authors of Rinjdael, its reviewers, nor NIST are 
willing to offer a 25 year warranty on it.

-- 
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.