azet at azet.org
Mon Jun 1 15:20:23 CEST 2015
> Thanks to Aaron, Max and Maciej!
> Yes I can see the point. What I was worried about originally is that,
> as Aaron points out, it's a point in time document and therefore cannot
> provide timely advice. But if it is done at a high enough level then
> that I guess works out.
During the preparation of this BCP this has come up repeatedly. I think
there're still plans to update the BCP if need be (or, for example, a
newer protocol version get's introduced, e.g. TLS 1.3).
> (This is also in my context of some work going on at IETF WGs aimed at
> improving the pre-design approaches to crypto protocols. Some of us are
> hoping to reduce the choice in future protocols in as many ways as we
> can so the load on sysadms & users is reduced.)
I've just updated my document on OCB mode. I know you don't like
agility, I'm somewhat on your side and reducing the effective number of
available cipher-suites is, in my opinion, an important step. But we
also need secure blockcipher modes that work without hardware-specific
instructions with high-performance on multiple architectures. GCM
completely fails in that regard.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Ach