From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects Ascon
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects Ascon
When encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure
than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
-marcel
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects AsconWhen encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
Marcel Hendrix schrieb am Sonntag, 15. Oktober 2023 um 11:12:22 UTC+2:[..]
No reason for paranoia:[..]
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 9:00:52 PM UTC+2, minforth wrote:
Marcel Hendrix schrieb am Sonntag, 15. Oktober 2023 um 11:12:22 UTC+2:[..]
No reason for paranoia:[..]
Why encrypt something if it is unimportant? I understand that the implementation
should be lightweight but don't see why 'easier' algorithms should be used.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 9:00:52 PM UTC+2, minforth wrote:Hi Marcel,
Marcel Hendrix schrieb am Sonntag, 15. Oktober 2023 um 11:12:22 UTC+2:[..]
No reason for paranoia:[..]
Why encrypt something if it is unimportant? I understand that the implementation
should be lightweight but don't see why 'easier' algorithms should be used.
<rant>
A not insignificant amount of my working day is spent logging in/out, finding and
renewing passwords, checking my phone for two-factor authentications that take
minutes to appear when IT updates a Linux server in India, trying to access simple
documents through horrendously layered Teams and Outlook "protections", fighting
with management that wants to abolish USB-sticks and network drives, and attending
mandatory safety drills that preach the use of long complicated passwords that shall
subsequently be saved in OneDrive repositories coupled to our Microsoft accounts :--)
</rant>
-marcel
Marcel Hendrix schrieb am Sonntag, 15. Oktober 2023 um 11:12:22 UTC+2:devices, stress detectors inside roads and bridges, and keyless entry fobs for vehicles. Devices like these need “lightweight cryptography” — protection that uses the limited amount of electronic resources they possess. According to NIST computer
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects AsconWhen encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
No reason for paranoia:
The chosen algorithms are designed to protect information created and transmitted by the Internet of Things (IoT), including its myriad tiny sensors and actuators. They are also designed for other miniature technologies such as implanted medical
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:Well, it's better than the nocrypt standard.
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects AsconWhen encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
-marcel
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:12:22 PM UTC+10, Marcel Hendrix wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:Well, it's better than the nocrypt standard.
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:When encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects Ascon
than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
-marcel
:)
On 20/10/2023 3:42 pm, S wrote:I spent a couple of days translating the C version of Ascon to Forth. I got it to encrypt and decrypt correctly but haven't beat on it yet. In 32-bit SwiftForth it uses 4300 bytes of dictionary. So maybe 1K on the J1? Anyway... Some observations.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:12:22 PM UTC+10, Marcel Hendrix wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote:Well, it's better than the nocrypt standard.
From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:When encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure >> than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects Ascon
-marcel
:)What is "less secure"? AFAIK most hacks are opportunistic e.g. Enigma
...
When cybersecurity standards are shoved down your throat, you will read in the fine print that they want NIST-approved algorithms. Not the one you picked because you happen to like it.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 10:50:51 PM UTC-7, dxf wrote:code. A 64-bit version of Ascon would make a nice Forth compiler benchmark.
On 20/10/2023 3:42 pm, S wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:12:22 PM UTC+10, Marcel Hendrix wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:01:07 AM UTC+2, Brad Eckert wrote: >>> From NIST's news release on February 07, 2023:Well, it's better than the nocrypt standard.
than others, and is promoted by a government controlled agency :--)
Lightweight Cryptography Standardization Process: NIST Selects Ascon >> When encryption is needed, who'd select an algorithm that is less secure
-marcel
I spent a couple of days translating the C version of Ascon to Forth. I got it to encrypt and decrypt correctly but haven't beat on it yet. In 32-bit SwiftForth it uses 4300 bytes of dictionary. So maybe 1K on the J1? Anyway... Some observations.:)What is "less secure"? AFAIK most hacks are opportunistic e.g. Enigma
I can see why it won. It's very friendly to 64-bit machines. There are no 64-bit IoTs, but those IoTs connect to servers which are 64-bit. It's also good on 32-bit, 16-bit, and 8-bit MCUs according to the benchmarks. It's no surprise looking at the C
AEAD (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authenticated_encryption) is the real selling point. Decryption checks the 128-bit tag at the end and returns a nonzero ior if it's not a match. The hash includes optional unencrypted data such as headers. Itturns out that authenticity is more important than privacy when it comes to potential "bad things".
You may wonder why anyone would want to adopt yet another cryptography algorithm when so many already exist. Today's cybersecurity attacks cost millions of dollars. IoTs are often attack vectors. The IoT dumpster fire was funny until it got expensive.Where there are these kinds of losses there are lawyers and regulators and eventually regulations. When cybersecurity standards are shoved down your throat, you will read in the fine print that they want NIST-approved algorithms. Not the one you picked
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 300 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 34:49:45 |
Calls: | 6,707 |
Files: | 12,239 |
Messages: | 5,353,338 |