From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <htd@fancy-poultry.org>
Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id ERze9Hj1atM9 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>;
 Sun, 14 Aug 2011 15:11:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.8])
 by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 15:11:47 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 15:12:08 +0200
From: Heinz Diehl <htd@fancy-poultry.org>
Message-ID: <20110814131208.GA2093@fancy-poultry.org>
References: <CAAhm=5X_gv6=7BOvv8Ov0Qmw2qd8xX9h3-D4GVMOTUoJXvP+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110814083201.GA17964@tansi.org>
 <20110814103210.GA1823@fancy-poultry.org>
 <20110814122257.GA20686@tansi.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110814122257.GA20686@tansi.org>
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] "re-encrypting" ?
List-Id: <dm-crypt.saout.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/options/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-crypt@saout.de>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=subscribe>
To: dm-crypt@saout.de

On 14.08.2011, Arno Wagner wrote: 

> It is on some architectures. It is also less secure.

As far as I know, both Serpent and Twofish has shown to be more secure than 
Rijndael. However, Rijndael was choosen as the new AES because of its overall
qualities (speed on various architectures, simplicity..).

http://csrc.nist.gov/archive/aes/round2/comments/20000515-bschneier.pdf

Anyway, I doubt this is playing an important role since none of these algorithms
has been broken yet.