Timeline for Is modern encryption needlessly complicated?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2019 at 2:36 | comment | added | forest | @Fixee It's considered broken in the cryptographic sense (AES is also considered broken, albeit whereas breaking DES using cryptanalysis is on the cusp of practicality, AES' break is considered totally impossible to pull off). "Broken" just means that it can be attacked faster than exhaustive search. | |
| May 11, 2019 at 2:29 | comment | added | Fixee | @forest DES is not considered broken by either linear or differential cryptanalysis given the huge number of plaintext/ciphertext pairs required in both cases. If anything, this requirement is a testament to DES's resistance to these attacks (almost every other existing block cipher succumbed after Biham-Shamir was published, but the NSA already knew about these attacks and tweaked IBM's Lucifer (later called DES) to resist them). | |
| Apr 23, 2019 at 11:15 | comment | added | forest | @Fixee DES is broken by linear cryptanalysis, but it requires terabytes of plaintext/ciphertext pairs. | |
| Sep 27, 2011 at 16:03 | comment | added | Fixee | @Ivo: DES was regarded as "broken" upon release (due to key length); 3DES is still secure (but painfully slow); if you know an attack, please post it. 3DES has an effective key length of at least 110 bits. When I said that DES has never been broken, I mean the construction, not the parameter set. | |
| Sep 27, 2011 at 10:54 | comment | added | Ivo | Well, DES is regarded as broken in the fact that its key is now short enough for someone with good computing power to find... 3DES is quite a bit harder, but I think not impossible. 128 bit keys, AFAIK, are beyond current computing power, and 256 bit keys are un-bruteforcable. | |
| Sep 4, 2011 at 17:30 | history | answered | Fixee | CC BY-SA 3.0 |