RE: Comparing Algorithms On The List OfHard-to-brut-force?

["Brandon Enright" <bmenrigh () ucsd edu>]

Brute forcing an algorithm suggests that you are not attacking a weakness or
known flaw in the algorithm but rather just running through the keyspace
trying to recover the plaintext.  In that case, whichever allows you to use
the most bits is what you want.

IIRC, there aren't any good known attacks against Blowfish, AES, or Twofish
so the *RIGHT* algorithm is whatever works best for your application.

Also, your encrypt-decrypt-encrypt choices may be "more" secure from a pure
brute force perspective but the marginal security they add doesn't negate
the difficulty of key management.

You should look into Bruce Schneier's book, "Applied Cryptography" (ISBN:
0471117099) for an excellent treatment on the subject.


Brandon Enright

Bipin Gautam wrote:

> hello list,
>
> Which Algorithm in the list is hard hard (more resource/computation
> consuming) to brute-force... (in order?) considering all other factor
> 'ALMOST' similar?
>
> views?
> ----------
> Blowfish
> AES
> Twofish
> AES-BLOWFISH
> Serpant
> CAST5
> AES-Twofish
> Serpant-AES
> AES-BLOWFISH-SERPANT
> Twofish-SERPANT
> Triple DES
> AES-Twofish-Serpant
> Serpant-Twofish-AES
>
>
>  * Feel free to discuss algorithms NOT LISTED here and also the ones
> used by FILE-COMPRESSION utilities ???
>
> Even if you know a geleral statistic abt. a few of these or any
> experience/info please share. I'm trying to draw a nice statistic BUT
> couldn't find it elsewhere.
>
> --
> Bipin Gautam
> http://bipin.tk

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/