-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"L. Sassaman" wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2000, Dennis Glatting wrote:
>
> > > Frankly, I can't understand why the IPsec protocol still allows DES. It
> > > should require strong encryption. Having DES in a product these days
> > > makes about as much sense as mandating the usage of ROT13.
> > >
> >
> > We are waiting for AES.
>
> So am I correct in assuming you are saying that DES will be disallowed as
> part of the IPsec protocol when AES is finalized?
>
> This would be good. I still think that DES should be dropped immediately,
> however.
>
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul
> C rowley writes:
>
> >I'm guessing that they have to have a MUST cipher, and they don't want
> >to change twice, so it makes sense to wait until September and then
> >make AES (or AES primary) the only MUST cipher.
>
> Correct.
>
Not historically. This has been an issue since long before AES was viable.
When Perry and Phil and I wrote the first IPSec DES RFC in 1995, we
recommended:
It is suggested that DES is not a good encryption algorithm for the
protection of even moderate value information in the face of such
equipment. Triple DES is probably a better choice for such purposes.
But the IPSec WG refused to make 3DES an official option. We had to
publish as "Experimental".
Since immediately after Deep Crack, Scott Bradner and I have had an
Applicability Statement draft out for years! An Applicability Statement
is a "Best Current Practice" that tells everyone in the Internet what
is recommended.
The Steering Group (IESG) officially REJECTED Last Call for the IETF,
saying:
The Security ADs do not agree with the conclusion "Currently
deployed equipment using DES should be eliminated, or upgraded to a
more robust algorithm and key length." Instead they believe that
new applications should use stronger technology and that efforts
should be made to gracefully phase out the use of DES. The IESG
therefore considers summary elimination proposed by your document
inappropriate
We are also not prepared to move RFC-2419, RFC-2405, RFC-1829 to
Historic status at this time.
If the relevant Working Group makes a request to the IESG to move its
RFCs to Historic Status, the IESG will consider it.
FYI, the PPP WG _DID_ ask! Here's the current history section from the
latest (unposted) draft:
History
On July 20, 1998, William Allen Simpson, with the concurrance of
Perry Metzger and Phil Karn, asked that their DES encryption Proposed
Standard [RFC-1829], and the related PPP DES encryption Proposed
Standard [RFC-1619], be declared Historic (removed from the Standards
Track), and recommended DESX [SB97] and Triple-DES [SMKD97] as
interim Proposed Standards until the selection of AES. With the
assistance of Scott Bradner, this Applicability Statement was written
to reflect the recommendation.
Instead, the IESG approved RFC-2405 (November 1998) and RFC-2419
(September 1998) for publication as Proposed Standards.
On March 18, 1999, the Security Area Advisory Group overwhelmingly
approved removal of DES from the Standards Track, and recommended
Triple-DES as mandatory to implement. This Applicability Statement
was updated to reflect the recommendation.
Instead, the IESG approved RFC-2574 (April 1999) for publication as +
Proposed Standard. +
On November 8, 1999, the Point-to-Point Protocol Extentions Working +
Group overwhelmingly approved removal of DES [RFC-2419] from the +
Standards Track, and recommended Triple-DES [RFC-2420] as mandatory +
to implement. On November 10, 1999, this recommendation was +
forwarded to the IESG Internet Area Directors by the Working Group +
Chair. +
Unfortunately, in a communication dated December 3, 1999, the IESG +
officially refused to publish this document as an Applicability +
Statement, stating they are "not prepared to move RFC-2419, RFC-2405, +
RFC-1829 to Historic status at this time."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.1
iQCVAwUBOSWLedm/qMj6R+sxAQEALgQAo+JYQjKU5H5W8QcPUjNzCmf7tRpGWv1w
v5lRXkzYs0Vlgfe/im/dm2fdA9T0YUmwcM0CqCY9FlC66iHeyKbeW69DhjvYk//i
QF3TqovutleLPawCzJil58dF8UQNVT2Ph2XET7SuA167haL33LSNTARqZWkcg1gZ
B0gd935BFeU=
=VaLi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
