Re: [TLS] [Cfrg] (confusing the issues) Re: 3DES diediedie

2016-08-29 Thread Greg Rose
Rene, thanks for clarifying my thoughts on this. You're right, in one sense, piling on on the bandwagon is often counterproductive. I'm reminded of Dijkstra's article "goto statement considered harmful", in 1968, which was cogent and important, but inspired any number of "XXX considered harmful"

Re: [TLS] [Cfrg] (confusing the issues) Re: 3DES diediedie

2016-08-29 Thread Rene Struik
My argument was aimed at focusing on the real topic at hand, not at mixing this with "religious" beliefs as ditching ciphers without clear justification (no matter how ancient 3-DES may be [I was in elementary school then]). I think it is unwise thinking too lightly about writing IETF drafts w

Re: [TLS] [Cfrg] (confusing the issues) Re: 3DES diediedie

2016-08-29 Thread Jon Callas
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 6:26 AM, Rene Struik wrote: > > I think it is a mistake to think that simply using block ciphers with a > larger block size is enough to counter attacks, as the literature on > successful side channel attacks on such block cipher demonstrates. The real > message is that