Ted Unangst wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 16:34, Kurt Mosiejczuk wrote:
And I'm fairly certain blowfish did get a lot of attention. And since
bcrypt is reasonably popular, I'd imagine blowfish *still* gets
attention from the cryptographic community.
The security of bcrypt is almost completely unrelated to the security
of blowfish as an encrpytion cipher.
My understanding is that actually, blowfish is significantly slower.
Mainly because of the setup required for each new key. I seem to recall
that was part of why blowfish didn't become AES.
blowfish was never submitted as an entry for AES. Being a 64-bit
cipher, it wasn't even eligible.
That's right. It was twofish that was put up to compete. My mistake.
--Kurt
