Twofish, Blowfish no recommended cipher anymore ?!

[1228EB6]

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

> On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 08:27:23PM +0200, 1228EB6 wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > when creating new keys with GnuPG 1.2.2 I saw that both Twofish and
> > Blowfish are not part of the available ciphers of those keys.
> >
> > None of the 2 has been broken and newer versions of PGP support
> > both of them, so what happened ? I'd like to know if there are
> > security concerns, since I've always been a fan of both ciphers.
>
> PGP only supports Twofish, not Blowfish.

Oh, I didn't know that, you're right:
http://www.pgp.com/products/personal/techspecs.html=20

> Those two ciphers are not in the default preferences for
> compatibility and conservatism reasons.  If you want to use Twofish
> and/or Blowfish, you can certainly update your preferences to include
> them.

Can the users be confident that GnuPG never drops those ciphers which=20
may never be supported by PGP (in the case of Blowfish), but have=20
(almost) always been a part of GnuPG ?

Thanks.
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/DbutEEe0OUphFNwRAwzGAJ9tWGopYRWxrqHxTyuT86Q+11qskACgq8o0
A0SnlGRqL+vtL9aMtxw0Zg4=3D
=3DbmU7
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----