3 ms·
RC4 (arcfour) should not be used, because it's broken. It has biases in its output (which is XOR-ed with the plaintext), which given enough cyphertext allows on
by cesarb 11y ago
RC4 (arcfour) should not be used, because it's broken. It has biases in its output (which is XOR-ed with the plaintext), which given enough cyphertext allows one to recover the plaintext (see http://www.rc4nomore.com/ http://www.rc4nomore.com/ for the most recent result).
OpenSSH since the 6.5 release (http://www.openssh.com/txt/release-6.5 http://www.openssh.com/txt/release-6.5) has a better alternative, ChaCha20. It's even faster than RC4, and has no known weaknesses AFAIK. Some more information: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/46812/what-does-chacha20-poly1305openssh-com-mean-for-me https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/46812/what-does...
- Scaevolus 11y agoChaCha20 is slower than RC4 in my testing (176MB/s vs 213MB/s). Since I have AESNI and PCMLMUL, aes128-gcm is the fastest-- 430MB/s. $ for c in $(ssh -Q cipher); do echo $c; dd if=/dev/zero bs=1M count=8K | ssh -o Compression=no -c $c localhost dd of=/dev/null 2>/dev/null; done