Re: What do you guys think about this?
"Dave Howe" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.encryption.cipe |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dick St.Peters wrote: > This is the heart of the issue. The problem here is one of lost > context. Crypto people are the bank vault designers of the software > world; in their context if a door isn't a meter of tempered steel > alloy it isn't a secure door. That's fine for bank vaults, but it's > more than a little silly for, say, apartment doors. You want an > apartment door that doesn't crush the building. > > A VPN should provide security that's good enough. If you're dealing > with state secrets or billions of dollars, CIPE is not good enough. > However, if you do business over ordinary phone lines and first class > mail, then using CIPE will make your VPN vastly more secure than the > rest of your operation, without consuming a lot of resources or > making things more complex than necessary. as aways, there is a tradeoff between "cost" and security. cost for cipe would probably be in one or more of design (coding) time, cpu time or complexity - a more secure hash might be worth that, and a choice of more secure cyphers can't be a bad thing. Maybe tempered steel alloy is overkill, but a choice of solid wood (if eggbox plywood is still available as a fallback option) might be nice.... -- Message sent by the [email protected] mailing list. Unsubscribe: mail [email protected], "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address. CIPE info and list archive: <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>