> don't people always say exactly that? This is an understandable reaction, but the security margin on new crypto is way higher than old crypto. Roughly speaki

> don't people always say exactly that? This is an understandable reaction, but the security margin on new crypto is way higher than old crypto. Roughly speaking, we went from "I guess if a state-level actor dedicated all their resources to this for a few decades, they could probably brute-force it" to "Even if you broke 9 out of 10 rounds in this algorithm, you'd still need to harness the energy of every star in the universe for 10 billion years to brute-force it." Most algorithms today have been "attacked" in the sense that there are tricks we can do that allow us to recover the key faster than a simple brute-force attack. But "faster" usually means doing something like 2^100 operations instead of 2^128 -- still far beyond the realm of practicality. It's telling that cryptographers are now seriously discussing reducing the security of various algorithms: https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1492 https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1492