On Thursday 03 July 2003 11:56 pm, Toad wrote: > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:49:59PM -0500, Tom Kaitchuck wrote: > > On Thursday 03 July 2003 08:51 pm, Toad wrote: > > > http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0209.html#1 > > > > > > This seems to suggest that AES with a 256 bit key can be cracked in > > > 2^100 effort. It is unclear what effect this would have on 128 bit AES, > > > however it seems prudent to use 256 bits if we can. Implementation > > > details? Any opposition? > > > > Hey, while we're on the subject I think the data store should default to > > 64bit (Blowfish). I find that gives better performance than 128 bit. And > > sense it does not prevent a node operator form knowing the contents of > > their store, because they could just turn it off... And there is the same > > protection legally speaking whether is is 64 or 128 bit, we might as well > > use the faster system. > > We don't encrypt the store and haven't done since we got rid of the > monolithic datastore in October.
In that case why is there still an option for it in the config file? _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
