Tell me more ×
Cryptography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote -1 down vote favorite

if the WINRAR encryption method(AES) is so unbreakable(by brute force), then why doesn't every software use a similiar encryption method?

share|improve this question
Why do you claim Winrar's encryption is unbreakable? Just like every other password based encryption, it's only as strong as the password. They use a decent iteration count in their KDF(~250k), but their actual encryption is clearly suboptimal(ECB mode). – CodesInChaos Nov 9 '12 at 11:15
2  
This is a very open ended question without a clear, definitive answer. On this site we stick to question on the theory and math of cryptography (see the faq). So I'm going to close this as off topic. – mikeazo♦ Nov 9 '12 at 14:47
Do you think being unbreakable by brute force is the only criterion when evaluating an encryption algorithm? A one-time pad is unbreakable by brute force too. Why doesn't everyone use those? – David Schwartz Nov 10 '12 at 0:57

closed as off topic by mikeazo♦ Nov 9 '12 at 14:47

Questions on Cryptography Stack Exchange are expected to relate to cryptography within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

1 Answer

up vote 0 down vote

Well, the applications that need that particular type of protection do. Or rather, those that realize they need it, do.

Those that use weaker crypto do so for a variety of reasons:

  • Backwards compatibility - It needs to work with older algorithms
  • Legal restrictions - Laws prevent stronger algorithms
  • Lack of knowledge - Not knowing what's secure vs not secure in their particular scenario, etc.
share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.