Talk:Advanced Encryption Standard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 5 June by 217.146.114.206 in topic Quantum attacks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".

Template:WikiProject banner shell User:MiszaBot/config Template:Archives

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.


AES-128 broken to a complexity of 2^96

join the effort it's open! The main programmer who is doing this work, is limited to a 4 core Xeon 1275 with 3 active cores. We need people with fast boxes and a will to look at the code and improve it.

Supported by the following refs:

  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1". (Blog, unreliable source)
  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1". (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