1993-09-29 - Re: Carl Ellison on ‘The Death of DES’

Header Data

From: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 18077f075ffaa6e0e2fdc61e0fc4ee13ae264ac8f073b88dd0610885502584cf
Message ID: <9309291229.AA11549@vail.tivoli.com>
Reply To: <9309282044.AA26047@ellisun.sw.stratus.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-09-29 12:36:23 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 29 Sep 93 05:36:23 PDT

Raw message

From: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 93 05:36:23 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Carl Ellison on 'The Death of DES'
In-Reply-To: <9309282044.AA26047@ellisun.sw.stratus.com>
Message-ID: <9309291229.AA11549@vail.tivoli.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



 > Carl Ellison says:
 > > 3.	in between DES operations, mix bytes up as with	tran (posted on
 > > 	sci.crypt occasionally, avbl from me by mail or on ripem.msu.edu)
 > > 	-- spreading bytes out within a huge block, further hiding any
 > > 	known text

Can someone comment on the efficacy of this technique when used in
conjunction with encryption modes other than ECB, and/or with the
simple XOR "pre-scramble" technique?  I agree that it "couldn't hurt",
security-wise, but of course it does introduce a (slight) processing
overhead.  If it introduces no real additional security, I don't see
the point.  (Enlighten me!)

(This for some reason reminds me of the way little kids tie shoes;
they sometimes make enormous knots which, ultimately, are weaker than
a simple bow.)

--
Mike McNally





Thread