From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 13:08:00 -0500
From: William Josephson <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Venti security in view of SHA-1 exploity
Message-ID: <20050220180800.GB47983@mero.morphisms.net>
References: <20050219224434.GB44386@mero.morphisms.net>
	<01bb01c516d5$143f6030$1f587d50@kilgore>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <01bb01c516d5$143f6030$1f587d50@kilgore>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 10cb3250-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 11:48:06PM +0100, boyd, rounin wrote:
> >To be more precise: 2DES doesn't buy you much over DES,
> >while 3DES would appear to.
>
> nope, there is a meet in the middle attack for 2DES and going
> to 3DES is trivial to implement.

Actually, if you look at the numbers you will see that the
meet in the middle attack makes 2DES roughly equivalent to
DES, but that that is not the case for 3DES.

 -WJ