Re: Double Encryption Illegal?

wtshaw wrote:
>
> <mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de> wrote:
> ...
> > You meant it should be triple, like 3-DES??
>
> When a person uses 3-DES, they are single encrypting with 3-DES. An
> algorithm can be made of any conbination of steps. When two or more
> pieces are combined, the result is one piece. Consider that such a
> request, regulation, standard, whim, or pipe dream to limit so called
> double encryption is a fog to confuse whereever possible; ambiguity shows
> dualism of purpose.

Ah, I understand. In your definition there is never any multiple encryption and a superencipherment is simply a single (big) encipherment, there being (presumably in your view) no need to mention that the whole is made of certain (in general) different components. I don't partake your viewpoint. For the components can, and are in fact commonly, used and evaluated singly. It is the art of combination that is of interest in a multiple encryption. We need to know (to emphasize) what the components are and how they get combined.

M. K. Shen Received on Sun Sep 17 2000 - 15:09:06 CEST