Subject: Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Perry E. Metzger <email@example.com>
Date: 03/03/2005 19:18:10
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> If the component (well respected etc etc) algorithms I have used
> in GBDE contains flaws so that they become individually less
> intrinsicly safe because their input is the output of another such
> algorithm, then the crypto-world has problems they need to work on.
The crypto world is a world of very brittle materials developed by
humans with finite capacities. We do our best, but we make
Combining algorithms in such a way that the result is unexpectedly
weak has been seen on several occasions.
The reason cryptographers are very cautious is because they have been
> Despite my best efforts to get people interested in reviewing GBDE,
> it doesn't seem to have succeeded in getting any attention until
> now, and I am very much looking forward to the competent review
> and input this will generate.
If you wish to hear my suggestions on how to get review, feel free to
contact me offline.