From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hubert Chan Subject: Re: The situation at hand and in the future Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 11:16:48 -0400 Sender: news Message-ID: <87r7t0iq3j.fsf@uhoreg.ca> References: <20040527200127.GS4990@nysv.org> <200405272105.i4RL5LDh026210@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <40B6670D.9060408@slaphack.com> <20040528063324.GT4990@nysv.org> <40B89C9C.5050307@slaphack.com> <20040529154917.GW4990@nysv.org> <40B919DF.3040408@slaphack.com> <20040530122713.GX4990@nysv.org> <40BA802C.5070907@slaphack.com> <20040531083835.GB4990@nysv.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com >>>>> "Markus" =3D=3D Markus T=F6rnqvist writes: [...] Markus> I heard once that using many encryptions may reduce the level of Markus> security. I don't know if there's any real truth behind Markus> this. But if there is, maybe it should be impossible to support Markus> two cryptos, only a crypto and a compression. I would have a hard time believing that double encryption would weaken anything (unless you're using ROT13). Double encryption might not make anything stronger, or might not strengthen more than you would expect (e.g. double DES is not "twice" as strong as single DES), though. 3-DES is basically just DES three times. I would also imagine that encrypting twice, each time with different ciphers, has a very good chance of being stronger than just a single encryption. --=20 Hubert Chan - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.