| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The SHA successors, for nowThe SHA successors, for nowPosted Aug 18, 2004 19:30 UTC (Wed) by jvotaw (subscriber, #3678)In reply to: The SHA successors, for now by mkettler Parent article: Crypto researchers abuzz over flaws (News.com)
I can believe that. This stuff is way over my head -- I should've emphasized the "hopefully" in my original message.
I was thinking of cases where people demonstrate a weakness in, say, a 9-round variant of an encryption algorithm, but feel safe with a 12- or 16-round variant, and was thinking the same thing *might* apply here.
But again, I'm way out of my depth.
-Joel
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||