Insecure by design: protocols for encrypted phone calls

Re:Insecure by design: protocols for encrypted phone calls by colejohnson66 on Thursday February 25, 2016 @02:25PM (#11177041)

> If a government agency responsible for signal monitoring and espionage suggests an encryption format, endorses one particular format over another or even just actively participates in such discussions -- shouldn't that raise alarm bells in most tech-savvy people's heads?

Yes, but the NSA did have a hand in AES

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insecure by design: protocols for encrypted phone calls by nickik on Thursday February 25, 2016 @03:18PM (#11177468)

The NIST and other state organsiation continue to be active in this area. However not all they do is poor evil and all the open standards AES or SHA1 have also been studied and reviewed by many other cryptographers. Most consider them still save for practical uscases.

Nowdays the NIST is guiding the process of standartisation, but does not itself activally doing anything. Most cryptographers agree that in the process for SHA3 ran quite smothly and they did a good job. However when the NIST tried to over some improvments, the crypto community heavly stomped them and these improvments never went into the standart.

There were talks on these subject in the last couple of Chaos Communication Congresses.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insecure by design: protocols for encrypted phone calls by cvwright on Thursday February 25, 2016 @03:55PM (#11177712)

Sure, NIST ran the competition, but AES was designed by Daemen and Rijmen in Belgium, and vetted by a whole host of other academic cryptographers in an open process.

There's enough to be paranoid about already. No need to looking for problems where there aren't any.

[ Parent | on HN ]