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 5grwmpdHGOp9 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>;
 Fri,  4 Jan 2013 21:20:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.10])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Fri,  4 Jan 2013 21:20:27 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 21:20:25 +0100
From: Heinz Diehl <htd@fancy-poultry.org>
Message-ID: <20130104202025.GA23856@fancy-poultry.org>
References: <50DF635C.90003@gmail.com> <50E6C1EC.1000307@gmail.com>
 <50E6C2B6.30505@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>
 <50E6C899.2060407@gmail.com> <20130104162652.GB22218@tansi.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130104162652.GB22218@tansi.org>
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Switch to XTS mode for LUKS in cryptsetup in 1.6.0
 (Was Re: [ANNOUNCE] cryptsetup 1.6.0-rc1)
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 04.01.2013, Arno Wagner wrote: 

> I think the current state is that in absolute terms AES256 is at 
> least as secure than AES128, but maybe not more so. 

What's behind the "maybe", actually? Are there any serious attacks
that can be carried out practically which reduces AES-256 to the
strength of AES-128? Or are those weaknesses only of theoretical
nature?