On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 12:44:23PM +0100, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
> Petro wrote/napisa?[a]/schrieb:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> > > 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> > > can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's
Petro wrote/napisał[a]/schrieb:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> > 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> > can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's and switch between
>
> DES/3DES was designed to be implemented in hardwar
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 12:44:23PM +0100, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
> Petro wrote/napisa?[a]/schrieb:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> > > 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> > > can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's
Petro wrote/napisał[a]/schrieb:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> > 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> > can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's and switch between
>
> DES/3DES was designed to be implemented in hardwa
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's and switch between
DES/3DES was designed to be implemented in hardware, doing a
software-only implementatio
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 12:17:32PM +1100, Steve Smith wrote:
> 3DES is generally considered strong enough. However, it is slow, and
> can effect performance. Try doing large 'scp's and switch between
DES/3DES was designed to be implemented in hardware, doing a
software-only implementati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 26 November 2001 12:08 am, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> I was not able to find references to the PuTTY author's opinion on
> the security of DES or 3DES on his web site, but I do know that PuTTY
> does support 3DES, if not DES.
I was thinking D
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 11:29:22PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
>
> On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> > So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
>
> The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
the security of des algorithm, which AFAIK it does
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 26 November 2001 12:08 am, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> I was not able to find references to the PuTTY author's opinion on
> the security of DES or 3DES on his web site, but I do know that PuTTY
> does support 3DES, if not DES.
I was thinking
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 11:29:22PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
>
> On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> > So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
>
> The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
the security of des algorithm, which AFAIK it does
Noah L Meyerhans writes:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true
>> that 3DES was created "by the government" back when private
>> cryptology was difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to
>> cons
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to b
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to b
rokes directly by their radion emissions from accross the
street.
Paranoid? Yes. That's what security is all about.
Curt-
-Original Message-
From: Noah L. Meyerhans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 21:43
To: Johannes Weiss
Cc: debian-security@lists.deb
Noah L Meyerhans writes:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true
>> that 3DES was created "by the government" back when private
>> cryptology was difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to
>> con
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to
oard strokes directly by their radion emissions from accross the
street.
Paranoid? Yes. That's what security is all about.
Curt-
-Original Message-
From: Noah L. Meyerhans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 21:43
To: Johannes Weiss
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 10:28:56AM +0100, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
> UNfortunately, WIN-SSH is very buggy, it only works if I take the 3des
> algorithm, if I take one of the others (blowfish,...) it crashed.
>
What is unfortunate about that? From my experien
ake one of the others (blowfish,...) it crashed.
>
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
>
It's not an answer to your 3DES question, but I would suggest
you check out:
Putty - http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
Full-featured Win32 SSH suite, t
ake one of the others (blowfish,...) it crashed.
>
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
>
It's not an answer to your 3DES question, but I would suggest
you check out:
Putty - http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
Full-featured Win32 SSH suite, t
it crashed.
So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
Weissi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE7/2hY3lkVkvL9FpcRAvwZAJ41z9i5OxI3Z4/8XHBXSz3nDri82ACgygcg
q36GFY3XkjC8ObFclJd7pp4=
=WJX5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
24 matches
Mail list logo
