Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:37:31 -0500 From: Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@rek.tjls.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com Subject: Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE Message-ID: <20050303163731.GA8001@panix.com> In-Reply-To: <8706.1109867494@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <200503021910.j22JAGCH081224@marlena.vvi.at> <8706.1109867494@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 05:31:34PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <200503021910.j22JAGCH081224@marlena.vvi.at>, "ALeine" writes: > > >Not necessarily, if one were to implement the ideas I proposed > >I believe the performance could be kept at the same level as now. > > I gave up on journalling myself because IMO it complicates > things a lot and the problem it solves is very very small. > > The impact in disk seeks is non-trivial to predict, but it is > very hard to argue that it will not lead to an increase in > disk seeks. (This is really a variant of the age old argument > between jounaling filesystems and "traditional" filesystems) > > I can only recommend that you try :-) > > We need more ideas and more people trying out ideas. I could not disagree more. When it comes to nonstandard homebrewed cryptosystems foisted off on unsuspecting users with a bundle of claims of algorithm strength that they're not competent to evaluate for themselves, we do not need more ideas, nor more people trying out ideas; we need less. Standard, widely analyzed cryptographic algorithms are good. -- Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050303163731.GA8001>