Re: Twofish

[hal@xxxxxxxx]

Tony Mione, <mione@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, writes:
> I would like to (if it is agreeable) add the concept of parameters for
> symmetric algorithms to my v1.1 laundry list. It should probably be handled
> in a similar fashion to the public-key parameters (for DSA, etc). This
> would probably mean specifying an 'Enhanced symmetric-key encrypted
> session-key packet' to replace the existing one but I will leave that up to
> the group to hash out.
>
> Does this sound reasonable to people?

OK, but as I said, there are three places (at least) where symmetric
key algorithms are specified.  In addition to the SKESK which you propose
to enhance, there is the public-key ESK, and also there is the secret
key packet where they are used to specify what algorithm encrypts the
secret key data.  So we would need perhaps three new packet formats.

Hal