Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW

Re: Choice of encryption modules...

by tachyon (Chancellor)
on Oct 28, 2004 at 04:50 UTC ( [id://403257]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Choice of encryption modules...

You have a bit of a problem in that last time I looked ActiveState had dropped support for the Crypt:: modules due to legal issues. See here on ASPN which gives you apologies and links to Randy Kobes repository. I don't know if CipherSaber is available as a ppm or not. That repository is down at the moment. I do know it is Pure Perl and as a result it will quite probably be a lot slower than C/XS based modules. Also a ppm is fairly redundant.

In terms of speed why not check yourself? Symetric ciphers are much faster that public/private key algorithms (PKI), in fact things like PGP only use PKI (RSA in that case) to encrypt the key. The rest of the plaintext is encoded with IDEA which is a symetric cipher. With a symetric cipher you have to share the secret key of course. Also you need a key length of about 3N with PKI to get roughly the same security as a symetric cipher key length N. Yes this is a generalisation. No my crypto is not good enough to prove it. I tend to use Blowfish but that is really only because I thought the name was kinda funky ;-) PGP is probably a good option if you want an assymetric PKI. IDEA is probably as good as any in practice for a symmetric.

But what can I say, I get really strange images in my head, and a wierd grin on my face, every time I use Blowfish :=) Twofish is also good, but I like fishing. Twofish2 is less brain dead, or so the author says, and it does have a certain symmetry. Given that 99.99%+ of us have no real idea how secure a cryptosystem is I think choosing a module based on the funkiness of the name is as good an algorithm as most.



Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Choice of encryption modules...
by TStanley (Canon) on Oct 28, 2004 at 16:16 UTC
    I don't know if CipherSaber is available as a ppm or not.

    Yes it is. I was able to install it from the PPM (ActiveState Perl Build 810 (Perl 5.8.4)

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing -- Edmund Burke
Re^2: Choice of encryption modules...
by jdtoronto (Prior) on Oct 28, 2004 at 17:23 UTC
    Thanks tachyon,

    Yeah, some of the names are really neat eh? I have been using Blowfish in my **nix stuff for a while now. But this app requires cross platform compatibility (we have users on all major Perl platforms with this app).

    One of my colleagues who does FPGA stuff for me has an implementation of Rijndael running in an Altera Stratix device which we use for secure data transmission over fibre, we have also done Twofish and Blowfish which some clients prefer. We have a somewhat advanced cordless phone prototype here - it is called the 'Blow-Phone' - guess which encryption stadard it uses :)

    For whatever reason it seems that things have changed at ActiveState. I checked last night and they have a variety of Crypt:: modules there now, including CipherSabre, Twofish, DES and TripleDES. CipherSabre I was able to instyall, the others - no, sadly. They seem to be listed by the repository but not actually available.


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://403257]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others surveying the Monastery: (5)
As of 2024-04-24 03:42 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found