From: Andrew Loewenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
To: dstoler@globalpac.com (dstoler)
Message Hash: 9b3f56de14aa6716506c6b0ac87988859540807935c908c39f8e50180359b874
Message ID: <9612171648.AA00578@ch1d157nwk>
Reply To: <v03007803aedc36589854@[206.170.230.134]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-17 16:49:02 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 08:49:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Andrew Loewenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 08:49:02 -0800 (PST)
To: dstoler@globalpac.com (dstoler)
Subject: Re: Blowfish Performance
In-Reply-To: <v03007803aedc36589854@[206.170.230.134]>
Message-ID: <9612171648.AA00578@ch1d157nwk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
dstoler@globalpac.com writes:
> Encryption and decryption are faster than the fastest DES
> implementation I've found, but the key expansion (subkey
> generation) is slow.
If you read the Blowfish design goals in Applied Cryptography you will find
that it purposely has slow key expansion in order to hamper brute force
cryptanalysis.
andrew
Return to December 1996
Return to “Andrew Loewenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>”
Unknown thread root