Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Evan Prodromou (evanprodromou.san-francisco.ca.us)
Date: Wed Nov 14 2001 - 11:03:19 CST
>>>>> "PB" == Paulo Barreto <sao19677terra.com.br> writes:
>> BTW, I was talking to a cryptanalyst over at ISSI and he was
>> having his doubts about some aspects of Rijndael. Has anyone
>> heard whether or not it will get tweaked before it becomes the
>> AES standard?
PB> Either clearly expose what these 'doubts' are or stop
PB> spreading such nonsense and boring (*) rumors.
Jeez, man! Give the poor bastardo a break. It's not like he claimed
that R1JND43L H4Z B33N KR4X0R'D or something. Isn't it perfectly
reasonable and in fact _desirable_ that a relatively new algorithm
under public review should show at least one tiny fault or possible
Needless to say, one reason public review is so important for crypto
is so we can evaluate and improve techniques. And when you're talking
about a 4+ year federal approval process, the government would
probably throw in some null transforms just to justify the long review
The public review input is available here:
...and nothing seems particularly egregious -- just typos and such --
but what the hell. Viola! Doubts!
Christ, man. No algorithm is perfect or received from on high on stone
tablets, fully formed. Doubts are never nonsense -- they're the
essence of science.
-- Evan Prodromou evanprodromou.san-francisco.ca.us