Originally the idea was to force third party implementers to implement
both Rijndael and Twofish because we werent sure which would become
AES.  Its still wise to implement with Cipher agnosticity, but its less of
an issue.

> I never saw the point of using a different cipher for data encryption
> then we do elsewhere. Rijndael is AES, Twofish will continue to grow
> more obscure.
> 
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 02:10:31AM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > Hi Oskar:
> > 
> > I noticed that AutoRequester uses Rijndael for inserting.  Is
> > this correct?  I thought Twofish was used for document encryption.
> > 
> > -- gj
> > 
> > --- snippet from AutoRequester.doPut
> > 
> > return 
> >    executeProcess(new PutRequestProcess(key, htl, "Rijndael",
> >                                                      metadata, data, 
> >                                                      new 
> > FileBucketFactory(), 
> >                                                      0, true));
> >       
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Freesites
> > (0.3) freenet:MSK at SSK@enI8YFo3gj8UVh-Au0HpKMftf6QQAgE/homepage//
> > (0.4) freenet:SSK at npfV5XQijFkF6sXZvuO0o~kG4wEPAgM/homepage//
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl at freenetproject.org
> > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
> 
> -- 
> 
> Oskar Sandberg
> oskar at freenetproject.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl

-- 
retry cog molest girl
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20011015/8a6b4071/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to