1996-04-15 - Re: carrick, Blowfish & the NSA

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>
Message Hash: 40c898845bdb8f5c2c4d6fef35c82d4ae00650539175e5b0469d774340f8ff1f
Message ID: <199604142325.TAA05683@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960414145921.29416C-100000@eskimo.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-15 02:57:20 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:57:20 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:57:20 +0800
To: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: carrick, Blowfish & the NSA
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960414145921.29416C-100000@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <199604142325.TAA05683@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Wei Dai writes:
> On the other hand, if you ask cryptographers what they would use if they
> were not concerned with efficiency, I think most of them would say triple
> DES.

I'd say that for most applications these days one needn't worry too

Almost all my internal communications these days inside my own LAN are
encrypted. I hardly if ever notice performance issues. When I do, I
decide if I don't care about the traffic (which sometimes is the case)
and then I use RC4.

Anyway, the point is that performance shouldn't be thought of as an
issue unless you have a system built and in use and you find that it
is a bottleneck. Often you would be surprised at how little of a
bottleneck it really is.