[Cryptography] From Nicaragua to Snowden - why no national standards should be considered in cryptosec

[Ben Laurie]

On 27 February 2016 at 23:31, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Feb 27, 2016 3:06 PM, "Ben Laurie" <ben at links.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 27 February 2016 at 17:04, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell at cs.tcd.ie>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> There's that. But "national" is also no good as a label, as
> >> AES is national and some national algs are less well vetted/known
> >> than others.
> >
> >
> > Ah, but AES is from the right nation.
> >
> > Its a crazy idea, I know, but there might be some nations who are not so
> keen on other nations mandating their crypto.
>
> Because Rijndael is such an American name. The AES was the result of an
> open international competition.
>
Run and judged by the US.

Other contests like Nessie have not produced standards that people want.
>

Not run and judged by the US.


> What's the advantage of national ciphers over AES? Just being different?
>

In what sense is AES not a national cipher? Its original name? Seriously?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20160227/64312885/attachment.html>