3 ms·

* Never said AES ECB was an alternative to DES. * I would never use 3DES. * I am aware of that, just TLDRing. SHA-256 is my cup of tea. * Did I say they were

by Cyph0n 10y ago

* Never said AES ECB was an alternative to DES. * I would never use 3DES. * I am aware of that, just TLDRing. SHA-256 is my cup of tea. * Did I say they were a MAC? I would use CBC HMAC + SHA-256 for that. * No idea, since I'm not an expert at AES. I feel like you're offended that I didn't like the article. It's just an opinion, don't take it personally.

tptacek 10y ago
I'm not offended that you didn't like the article. I'm saying you failed to summarize it. I'm pretty sure I know what the point of this particular article was. :)
- Cyph0n 10y ago
  OK, fair enough.
CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
> * Never said AES ECB was an alternative to DES. > AES CBC instead of ECB or (gasp) Triple DES What? This entire vein of conversation is nothing but miscommunication. These are two choices a developer should use: * crypto_secretbox() and crypto_secretbox_open() from NaCl or libsodium * rm -rf code/ && shutdown Yes, a privileged few are actually capable of cobbling together a secure cryptosystem out of AES, HMAC, SHA2-family hash functions, and maybe Ed25519 and X25519 if they have a sane implementation available. The general public should just use whatever AEAD mode they're provided and not build their own disaster. > * I would never use 3DES. Good. > * I am aware of that, just TLDRing. SHA-256 is my cup of tea. SHA-384 is mine. https://blog.skullsecurity.org/2012/everything-you-need-to-know-about-hash-length-extension-attacks https://blog.skullsecurity.org/2012/everything-you-need-to-k... Except for passwords. You don't use simple hash functions for passwords. > * Did I say they were a MAC? I would use CBC HMAC + SHA-256 for that. I'm assuming you meant AES-CBC + HMAC-SHA-256 here, in an encrypt-then-authenticate mode. By "assuming" I of course meant "hoping". > * No idea, since I'm not an expert at AES. AES expertise isn't the issue here. Composing a secure cryptography protocol out of standard implementations is a rare skill set among software engineers.
- Cyph0n 10y ago
  And I thought I couldn't have gotten a worse response! Good job :)

by Cyph0n 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

I'm not offended that you didn't like the article. I'm saying you failed to summarize it. I'm pretty sure I know what the point of this particular article was. :)

Cyph0n 10y ago
OK, fair enough.

CiPHPerCoder 10y ago

> * Never said AES ECB was an alternative to DES. > AES CBC instead of ECB or (gasp) Triple DES What? This entire vein of conversation is nothing but miscommunication. These are two choices a developer should use: * crypto_secretbox() and crypto_secretbox_open() from NaCl or libsodium * rm -rf code/ && shutdown Yes, a privileged few are actually capable of cobbling together a secure cryptosystem out of AES, HMAC, SHA2-family hash functions, and maybe Ed25519 and X25519 if they have a sane implementation available. The general public should just use whatever AEAD mode they're provided and not build their own disaster. > * I would never use 3DES. Good. > * I am aware of that, just TLDRing. SHA-256 is my cup of tea. SHA-384 is mine. https://blog.skullsecurity.org/2012/everything-you-need-to-know-about-hash-length-extension-attacks https://blog.skullsecurity.org/2012/everything-you-need-to-k... Except for passwords. You don't use simple hash functions for passwords. > * Did I say they were a MAC? I would use CBC HMAC + SHA-256 for that. I'm assuming you meant AES-CBC + HMAC-SHA-256 here, in an encrypt-then-authenticate mode. By "assuming" I of course meant "hoping". > * No idea, since I'm not an expert at AES. AES expertise isn't the issue here. Composing a secure cryptography protocol out of standard implementations is a rare skill set among software engineers.

Cyph0n 10y ago
And I thought I couldn't have gotten a worse response! Good job :)