From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: , <029701c385b0$686b32e0$b9844051@insultant.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] spam rejection after reception does have limits Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:14:13 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 550cec8c-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 boyd, rounin wrote: > that's why we don't use 2DES, 'cos there is theoretical attack where > you meet in the the middle. sure, it's costly, but the solution is to go > to 3DES. DES 'died' back in the early '90s (unless you were the NSA, > where it probably died well before that). DES was never authorized for protecting classified information (except in a true emergency). AES, however, is authorized for two levels of protection (e.g. SECRET in an unclassified environment), and since AES is much faster than 3DES it seems a much better choice.