Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES #42578

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 3, 2022
Merged

doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES #42578

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 3, 2022

Conversation

tniessen
Copy link
Member

@tniessen tniessen commented Apr 2, 2022

This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys. This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

@tniessen
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
2be7522 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. tls Issues and PRs related to the tls subsystem. labels Apr 2, 2022
@tniessen tniessen added the security Issues and PRs related to security. label Apr 2, 2022
@tniessen tniessen added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Apr 3, 2022
@jasnell jasnell added the fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. label Apr 3, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 3, 2022

Fast-track has been requested by @jasnell. Please 👍 to approve.

@aduh95 aduh95 added the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Apr 3, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Apr 3, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot merged commit d83e7a0 into nodejs:master Apr 3, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Landed in d83e7a0

juanarbol pushed a commit to juanarbol/node that referenced this pull request Apr 5, 2022
@tniessen @juanarbol
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
e158a8d 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: nodejs#42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
This was referenced Apr 5, 2022
Closed
Merged
juanarbol pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 6, 2022
@tniessen @juanarbol
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
beffed1 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: #42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
xtx1130 pushed a commit to xtx1130/node that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2022
@tniessen @xtx1130
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
bda773c 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: nodejs#42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
juanarbol pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 31, 2022
@tniessen @juanarbol
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
55567cf 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: #42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
@juanarbol juanarbol mentioned this pull request May 31, 2022
Closed
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2022
@tniessen @danielleadams
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
cea7759 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: #42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2022
@tniessen @targos
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
77a8252 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: #42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 31, 2022
@tniessen @targos
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
88108da 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: #42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
@targos targos mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2022
Merged
guangwong pushed a commit to noslate-project/node that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2022
@tniessen @guangwong
doc: remove faulty justification for 128-bit AES
43395cf 
This sentence implies that AES-128 is preferred over AES-256 because
of a related-key attack from 2009. However, that attack by Alex
Biryukov, Orr Dunkelman, Nathan Keller, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Adi
Shamir, while impressive, is only effective against variants of
AES-256 with a reduced number of rounds and it requires related keys.
This means that the attack is not effective against AES-256 as it is
used within TLS.

(AES-128 is still often preferred over AES-256 simply because it is
believed to be sufficiently secure and because it is faster.)

PR-URL: nodejs/node#42578
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <mestery@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Mohammed Keyvanzadeh <mohammadkeyvanzade94@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jasnell jasnell jasnell approved these changes

@Trott Trott Trott approved these changes

@lpinca lpinca lpinca approved these changes

@cjihrig cjihrig cjihrig approved these changes

@Mesteery Mesteery Mesteery approved these changes

@VoltrexKeyva VoltrexKeyva VoltrexKeyva approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. security Issues and PRs related to security. tls Issues and PRs related to the tls subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
9 participants
@tniessen @nodejs-github-bot @jasnell @Trott @lpinca @cjihrig @Mesteery @VoltrexKeyva @aduh95