Talk:Advanced Encryption Standard

How you can help:

Talk:Advanced Encryption Standard

Citation Needed for Optimization of Cipher

Where did the information in this section come from? 129.74.154.239 (talk)

Poorly referenced assertion that ChaCha is better.

In this diff, someone added the following content:

Where the CPU hardware does not support AES acceleration, ChaCha is an alternative cipher with better performance and without sacrificing security.

Supported by the following refs:

  • "So you want to use an alternative cipher…". A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering. 9 October 2012. (Blog, unreliable source)
  • Bernstein, Daniel. "Why switch from AES to a new stream cipher?". cr.yp.to. Retrieved 17 February 2021. (The website of the maker of ChaCha is not going to be neutral w.r.t ChaCha)

This violates WP:UNDUE, especially since the references supporting this assertion are rather dubious. Blogs are not reliable sources, as per WP:BLOGS. The website of the designer of ChaCha is not a neutral nor reliable source, as per WP:NPOV and WP:SPS. Samboy (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Neither of those references supports the claim in any way. —Naddy (talk) 10:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Quantum attacks

The Quantum attacks section states that AES-128 will be insecure (due to Grover’s algorithm). I'm not an expert, but as I understand it there is debate around the topic and this should be reflected in the article. See NCSC presentation and NIST IR.8547 (ipd), both more recent than the citations in the article. 217.146.114.206 (talk) 09:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.