Timeline for Twofish vs. Serpent vs. AES (or a combo)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Sep 28, 2020 at 15:35 | history | suggested | SWdV | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Link was broken
|
| Sep 28, 2020 at 14:59 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Sep 28, 2020 at 15:35 | |||||
| Feb 25, 2018 at 4:04 | comment | added | forest | Actually AES is known to be broken in the purely cryptographic sense of the word (i.e. there are attacks which can recover plaintext or the key more efficiently than brute force, even if still well out of reach for humanity). And Serpent has a higher security margin than AES anyway. Of course, they're all completely fine. I'd say AES is the fastest and most resistant to side-channel attacks, while Serpent is the most secure. Twofish is extra vulnerable to side-channel attacks due to large, key-dependent S-boxes, though. They're all unbreakable anyway. | |
| S Apr 19, 2017 at 16:27 | history | suggested | Chad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added clarity and punctuation
|
| Apr 19, 2017 at 14:19 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 19, 2017 at 16:27 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://crypto.stackexchange.com/ with https://crypto.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jan 4, 2016 at 0:54 | vote | accept | Jack | ||
| Mar 1, 2015 at 16:14 | history | answered | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | CC BY-SA 3.0 |