41 reputation
3
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 6 months
seen Jun 20 '13 at 22:27

Jun
20
comment Is the 64-bit blocksize a fatal issue when encrypting TBs of data with Blowfish CBC?
Also, according to wikipedia: "Blowfish. Blowfish's weak keys produce bad S-boxes, since Blowfish's S-boxes are key-dependent. There is a chosen plaintext attack against a reduced-round variant of Blowfish that is made easier by the use of weak keys. This is not a concern for full 16-round Blowfish." So, I think that answers my question regarding the reflection attack? Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Jun
20
comment Is the 64-bit blocksize a fatal issue when encrypting TBs of data with Blowfish CBC?
I think I may have found the answer to my main question here: crypto.stackexchange.com/a/1106/7298. And basically I'm gathering this means that when encrypting TBs of data there is a very high chance of some plaintext leaks, but only 8 bytes here and there? So it probably wouldn't actually matter. Another thing is... since Crashplan uses data de-duplication, would this mean that this actually might not be an issue whatsoever as it won't be encrypting the same data twice ever?
Jun
20
revised Is the 64-bit blocksize a fatal issue when encrypting TBs of data with Blowfish CBC?
reworded one of my questions slightly
Jun
20
awarded  Editor
Jun
20
awarded  Student
Jun
20
revised Is the 64-bit blocksize a fatal issue when encrypting TBs of data with Blowfish CBC?
added 2 characters in body
Jun
20
awarded  Informed
Jun
20
asked Is the 64-bit blocksize a fatal issue when encrypting TBs of data with Blowfish CBC?