Re: Index for ftp site csn.org:/mpj/
I just recently got MacRipem and find it much easier to use th an PGP, and was wondering why I should use PGP over Ripem. The above seems to indicate that Ripem isn't as secure. Why is this? I don't doubt that its much easier to use -- it was written by Ray Lau, who is an excellent Mac/UI programmer. The most reasonable reasons why it might be called "less secure" is that RIPEM does not have a signature web like PGP does. It is possible in PEM to only have one signature on your certificate, which can be your own signature, or that of a CA. Therefore, you either have the status of "I say I am who I say I am", or a "Certification Authority says I am who I say I am". I can't speak for RIPEM, but that's not accurate for PEM. You can have as long a chain of signatures as you want up to the certifying authority. That may not be as general as you'd like, but it's better than just a single authority. A bigger problem is that PEM uses DES rather than IDEA. I just learned of a new attack by Mitsuru Matsui of Mitsubishi that requires 2^43 *known* plaintexts, not chosen ones. The note I received says that it ``breaks the scheme in 50 days on 12 HP9735 workstations''. This was presented last week at the Japanese Conference on Cryptography and Information Security.
A bigger problem is that PEM uses DES rather than IDEA. I just learned of a new attack by Mitsuru Matsui of Mitsubishi that requires 2^43 *known* plaintexts, not chosen ones. The note I received says that it ``breaks the scheme in 50 days on 12 HP9735 workstations''. This was presented last week at the Japanese Conference on Cryptography and Information Security.
Anybody have an online copy of the paper, or a complete citation? Eric Blossom
participants (2)
-
Eric Blossom -
smb@research.att.com