Re: Data integrity check in CIPE - Please explain me the necessityor benefit of a larger checksum.

"Hans Steegers" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.encryption.cipe
Message-ID <000601c3867f$7e693ae0$d620a8c0@pcw_hans.hnsasd.priv>
п╒п╟я─п╟я│п╬п╡, (Taracos?)

>IMHO:
>Don't think that slowing down throughput less than 2 times is a real issue.

For me it is a big issue: using CIPE without compression over a 256 kbps
(ADSL) link using a P150 cpu is just too frustratingly slow to be usable.
With compression it works great for connecting two LANs. I can't afford more
than 5-10% decrease in speed. Slow LAN-to-LAN connections are frustrating to
work with.

The choice for CIPE was speed, elegance and simplicity with (for my use)
acceptable security.

If I want to waste 50% of my available bandwidth for unnecessary overhead,
then there are many other alternatives and no need for the effort to improve
CIPE.

>Although if using SHA-1 makes it more than 2 times slower, we may use, for
>example, another blowfish key (generated and distributed exactly under the
>same conditions as the main key), then reduce it to 32, 64, or even 1 bit
>via xor operation.

It came to my mind (HMAC-blowfish), but I still have to do some research on
it: encrypt a 32 (or 64) bit CRC using Blowfish with a 64 bit secret key,
for example. The components are already available, and it could be a
solution.

An increased number of bytes for the appended digest is not so important (a
speed penalty of a few percents for full-size data packets), but the
CPU-overhead is. We need to find a sensible and balanced compromise, that
works well, even on a 386 or 486.

1 bit? Are you joking? I am missing the point about using XOR operations.

>As far as I know, if F(X) is strong enough, then hash H(X) made of F() as
>xoring parts of F()'s output is strong enough.

No idea (yet).
The only important part is that we can detect reliably if the MAC is
changed.

>Correct me or ignore me if I'm wrong :)

Why should I ignore you?

Thanks for your response,

Hans Steegers



--
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>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.