3 ms·
I was referring to CAST5
by na85 5y ago
I was referring to CAST5
- forgotmypw17 5y agoBased on my reading, there are no serious known issues with CAST5, with a minor issue being its small block size. [1] Is there anything else? [1] https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/24045/is-cast5-still-a-secure-algorithm-to-use https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/24045/is-cast5-st...
- upofadown 5y agoThis might represent a common misconception about PGP. The algorithm preference information is embedded in the PGP identity. It is signed by the certification/signing key. So a downgrade attack would involve breaking the cryptogrphy used for the certification/signing key. CAST5 is not used for certification or signing and has been nowhere close to the start of the preferences for a really long time. Having CAST5 as some sort of last ditch backward compatibility thing is no more of a weakness than the fact that the computer I am using to write this has an MD5 command. Having said that, what is wrong with CAST5 for PGP application? What does it have to do with a system that is all about signing things?