From: “Ian Farquhar” <ianf@sydney.sgi.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 2fdda31cffdf960c74df0a1aebeafb370cedfe145a55b3ba42ce4282f3fe1131
Message ID: <9412121029.ZM10788@wiley.sydney.sgi.com>
Reply To: <199412111825.KAA24116@desiree.teleport.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-11 23:42:22 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 11 Dec 94 15:42:22 PST
From: "Ian Farquhar" <ianf@sydney.sgi.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 94 15:42:22 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: A few articles of interest...
In-Reply-To: <199412111825.KAA24116@desiree.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <9412121029.ZM10788@wiley.sydney.sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Whoops. I have a nasty feeling that a brushed key might just have sent an
unedited version to the list. If so, my apologies.
On Dec 11, 10:27am, Alan Olsen wrote:
> - Bruce Schneier has an article on GOST. (A Soviet varient on DES.)
GOST is not a variant on DES. It is the Soviet equivalent of DES.
The algorithms do have some similarities (eg. the use of S-boxes to provide
diffusion), it is a Feistal network, but is in other ways interestingly
different. I believe that it has been undergoing quite a bit of Western
cryptanalysis over the past year, although I have not seen any results as
yet.
IMO, one of the most interesting features of GOST is that the S-boxes
are not specified in the algorithm's definition. Apparently you had to
apply to the government for them, and they would respond with ones they
wanted you to have. It is presumed that the security of the ones you
were given depended on how much they trusted you, and how much they wanted
what you were protecting to remain a secret. I recall that Matt (?)
posted a set of standard non-classified (probably low-security) Soviet
S-boxes for GOST a couple of months ago.
Ian.
Return to December 1994
Return to “m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)”