| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 56:45:26 |
| Calls: | 584 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,139 |
| D/L today: |
179 files (27,921K bytes) |
| Messages: | 112,128 |
Is this blog post significant? <https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
Is this blog post significant? <https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
Anonymous <nobody@yamn.paranoici.org> wrote:
Is this blog post significant?
<https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
The major significance is this sentence fragment from the first
paragraph:
"and should not be used for new applications."
Don't start a new project and pick Blowfish as the cipher.
On 16/07/2025 00:07 Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
Anonymous <nobody@yamn.paranoici.org> wrote:
Is this blog post significant?
<https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
The major significance is this sentence fragment from the first
paragraph:
"and should not be used for new applications."
Don't start a new project and pick Blowfish as the cipher.
I can't conjure up any application which uses Blowfish, except
maybe older versions of TrueCrypt and E4M.
The Running Man <running_man@writeable.com> wrote:
On 16/07/2025 00:07 Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
Anonymous <nobody@yamn.paranoici.org> wrote:
Is this blog post significant? <https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
The major significance is this sentence fragment from the first paragraph:
"and should not be used for new applications."
Don't start a new project and pick Blowfish as the cipher.
I can't conjure up any application which uses Blowfish, except
maybe older versions of TrueCrypt and E4M.
At this point, they would all likely be old legacy applications, few of which are likely still in use.
Rich wrote:
The Running Man <running_man@writeable.com> wrote:
On 16/07/2025 00:07 Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
Anonymous <nobody@yamn.paranoici.org> wrote:
Is this blog post significant?
<https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
The major significance is this sentence fragment from the first
paragraph:
"and should not be used for new applications."
Don't start a new project and pick Blowfish as the cipher.
I can't conjure up any application which uses Blowfish, except
maybe older versions of TrueCrypt and E4M.
At this point, they would all likely be old legacy applications, few of
which are likely still in use.
The problem is that the OP is one of many people from a.p.a-s who are
still using old hard/software and are not upgrading nor following the
latests best security practices.
On 15/07/2025 16:54, Anonymous wrote:
-a-a Is this blog post significant?
<https://hatchjs.com/cryptographydeprecationwarning-blowfish-has-been-deprecated/>
Somewhat, though nothing new.
Blowfish uses 64-bit blocks which can lead to birthday and other
collision attacks - nowadays even 128 bits isn't really enough for a new block cipher (some may disagree). 3DES has the same block size problem.
Blowfish is also susceptible to meet-in-the-middle and differential
attacks. The variable key size is also problematic.
Implemented properly Blowfish is still secure - but it is getting harder
to implement it properly, and some older implementations may no longer
be secure. You have to worry about total traffic encrypted under one
key, key size, some restrictions in modes - so overall it is considered better to use something more modern.
Also again, as it is being deprecated, some platforms may no longer
support it.
Peter Fairbrother
Someone rescaled Blowfish to 128-bit blocks:
https://alexpukall.github.io/blowfish2/blowfish2-gcc.txt
But the memory print of this version is monstrous.
Chax Plore <nznmrqmrxr@qazk.bet> wrote:
Someone rescaled Blowfish to 128-bit blocks:
https://alexpukall.github.io/blowfish2/blowfish2-gcc.txt
But the memory print of this version is monstrous.
Can you quantify "monstrous"? Just how big is that?
Chax Plore <nznmrqmrxr@qazk.bet> wrote:
Someone rescaled Blowfish to 128-bit blocks:
https://alexpukall.github.io/blowfish2/blowfish2-gcc.txt
But the memory print of this version is monstrous.
Can you quantify "monstrous"? Just how big is that?
On 2025-07-24 22:03, Rich wrote:
Chax Plore <nznmrqmrxr@qazk.bet> wrote:
Someone rescaled Blowfish to 128-bit blocks:
https://alexpukall.github.io/blowfish2/blowfish2-gcc.txt
But the memory print of this version is monstrous.
Can you quantify "monstrous"? Just how big is that?
In this particular case: 16912 bytes total of P-box and S-boxes onstants.