Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: palmer

You don’t give your enemy ANY hint as to your capabilities or the means to defeat them; hence, you do NOT publish encryption algorithms. The NSA doesn’t publish military grade encryption for that very reason, not because they the algorithms are weak in any way. In fact, AES is pathetically weak in comparison to military grade encryption.


81 posted on 09/25/2016 11:06:32 AM PDT by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]


To: CodeToad
In fact, AES is pathetically weak in comparison to military grade encryption.

Like any encryption algorithm AES is not perfect: http://eprint.iacr.org/2009/374 but you can add more rounds: http://security-architect.com/does-size-matter-aes-128-bit-encryption-is-probably-good-enough/ to add strength. As the latter link mentions AES was designed and selected to be both strong and efficient. Therefore it is weaker than it could be without the efficiency requirement.

I am sure there are classified encryption algorithms. But I consider those to be relics of a bygone era. Like this now declassified: https://www.gwern.net/docs/1955-nash In the 50's we classified many things that are common knowledge now. If we still have classified algorithms, how do we know that Snowden didn't send those to the Chinese and Russians?

82 posted on 09/25/2016 1:37:01 PM PDT by palmer (turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson