Timeline for Is there a contingency plan in the event of a catastrophic attack on AES?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feb 25, 2019 at 3:54 | history | edited | forest | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
80 bits is not nearly as worrying as 50
|
Jan 21, 2019 at 5:18 | history | edited | forest | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
linked to archive of round 2 report
|
Jan 17, 2019 at 23:12 | history | edited | kodlu | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
spelling of "catastrophic"
|
Jan 17, 2019 at 14:03 | answer | added | Maarten Bodewes♦ | timeline score: 16 | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 13:58 | comment | added | Maarten Bodewes♦ | Of course, with the government shutdown, this question could not have come at a worse time. | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 13:02 | answer | added | AleksanderCH | timeline score: 4 | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 12:38 | comment | added | SEJPM | Note that chances are that a replacement of all AES implementations would take about a decade (based on similar estimates for a migration to PQ crypto), longer if additional time is needed to select a replacement (2-5 years). | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 12:12 | comment | added | forest | @redplum That's a related key attack which is not an issue when you're using AES with random keys. | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 12:11 | comment | added | redplum | @kelalaka increasing key size does not nessecarily increase the security. For example, the best known attack on AES256 is better than the best known attack on AES128. | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 12:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCrypto/status/1085869501818769409 | ||
Jan 17, 2019 at 8:49 | comment | added | kelalaka | I think the first approach against an attack was the increasing key size. Though this may not prevent all kind of attacks. | |
Jan 17, 2019 at 8:30 | history | asked | forest | CC BY-SA 4.0 |