faramir.cl at gmail.com
Wed Sep 24 07:51:57 CEST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Robert J. Hansen escribió:
> Faramir wrote:
>> didn't include Blowfish because I was told it is not supported by PGP
> PGP can read Blowfish traffic. It won't generate Blowfish traffic, but
> that's a separate issue.
Interesting... I will add it to my list... please note I am still
talking about what I can receive, I intend to keep using the most used
algo's in my preferred algo's as a sender... maybe not in the same
order, but the same list.
>> [Schneier] says people should move to Twofish.
> No, Schneier has recommended people abandon Twofish and move to AES.
Maybe he said both things, my source was wikipedia, but they provided
a link to the interview where he said that:
Dahna, McConnachie (2007-12-27). "Bruce Almighty: Schneier preaches
security to Linux faithful". Computerworld 3. Retrieved on 2007-12-31.
"At this point, though, I'm amazed it's still being used. If people ask,
I recommend Twofish instead."
> A lot of people are still quite fond of Blowfish. It's a beautifully
> simple algorithm, quite elegant, and well-studied. I have a personal
> liking for it just for its simplicity.
And according to Wikipedia, the only known way to break the full 16
rounds implementation is brueforce... it seems the only one who
recommends to move is its author...
> The all time best advice re: preferences is "unless you know what you're
> doing and why, stick with the defaults." The defaults work just fine
> for the overwhelming majority of users. Maybe one user in a thousand
> will ever need to tweak them.
Yes, that is true. But I don't see any reason to don't "play" a bit
with the settings, as long as nothing gets broken in the game...
>> What is better, to use S1 S2 S2 codes, or the names? I figure using the
>> codes would save a bit of space, and since I don't have to keep those
>> codes in my memory, it is not a problem for me to enter them that way.
> Names. Definitely names. Much less chance of screwing them up and
> accidentally doing something like preferring SHA1 over SHA256.
Actually, I copied both the names and the codes to make the list, and
then I deleted the names, without modifying the order... and I was
intending to copy/paste the list, to avoid those accidents ;)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users