-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 El 26-02-2011 15:59, Simon Ward escribió: > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 07:49:41AM -0300, Faramir wrote: ... >> There is an interview somewhere (I was looking for it to provide >> citation, but I was unable to find it. I think it used to be in his blog). > > This one[1]? It doesn’t mention AES though… The topic was discussed on > this list a couple of years ago (and probably many other times)[2]. > > [1]: http://www.schneier.com/news-048.html
Right, my fault, as always I mixed things. But the following link the the one > [2]: http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2008-September/034622.html Here he says Twofish has speed comparable with AES, without some vulnerabilities (but Serpent is considered even more secure). However, he says if AES fails, you won't be blamed for using it (so is the safest for your career). If you chose Twofish, and it is broken, you will be blamed for choosing it Best Regards -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJNaXAyAAoJEMV4f6PvczxAvTsH/i2Lf4Fg3fhIFfWQv6286PxF W3l23IqRHiBnmuoTN2t1iv4CDR0yro/w/qoj/c4+oTSFklXt8d+jFepcUkwqc2O1 jhBDsWx/6e2W9j/G6ApyO76w1F8JiAsN84IQZGLMQ3qgbTKt/7oAwuF540ZDVX3C 2lNaOZeegj7xnNfLwUPgTzGnM1qDSHNhne+wk82jUPSD0xfEm7ILZbr7aomdkGL1 31Bw5WwXucG4RkW3UlOHFi0EG+MKtUBbA5frx5JPzjMPFrT29rH3+pEa92SbLpKk m6V3fv/jIrSagNauFZWr8odRp/vFWypf6o94rsMor7j9oKm6NZCcVEczEnWQhCs= =YgI5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
