Who said “32 round Rijndael” in the third AES Conference

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












This is a historical question. In the third AES Conference of NIST (AES3), April 13-14, 2000, New York, near the end of the conference, one representative for each of the last 5 candidates sit on a table and people asked questions to them.



One interesting question was;



  • Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?

As far as I can remember, the representative of Rijndael was the last to answer, was sitting on the right end. The first 3 were simply said The Rijndael. But, the 4. person said I want 32-round Rijndael



  • Was he Bruce Schneier? See his suggest on his Blog.

  • What was the choice of the representative of Rijndael?









share|improve this question



















  • 4




    I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
    – poncho
    yesterday







  • 1




    So, you were there, too?
    – kelalaka
    yesterday






  • 2




    Yup...…..………...
    – poncho
    yesterday










  • @kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
    – 0skar
    7 hours ago










  • @0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
    – kelalaka
    7 hours ago














up vote
6
down vote

favorite












This is a historical question. In the third AES Conference of NIST (AES3), April 13-14, 2000, New York, near the end of the conference, one representative for each of the last 5 candidates sit on a table and people asked questions to them.



One interesting question was;



  • Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?

As far as I can remember, the representative of Rijndael was the last to answer, was sitting on the right end. The first 3 were simply said The Rijndael. But, the 4. person said I want 32-round Rijndael



  • Was he Bruce Schneier? See his suggest on his Blog.

  • What was the choice of the representative of Rijndael?









share|improve this question



















  • 4




    I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
    – poncho
    yesterday







  • 1




    So, you were there, too?
    – kelalaka
    yesterday






  • 2




    Yup...…..………...
    – poncho
    yesterday










  • @kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
    – 0skar
    7 hours ago










  • @0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
    – kelalaka
    7 hours ago












up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











This is a historical question. In the third AES Conference of NIST (AES3), April 13-14, 2000, New York, near the end of the conference, one representative for each of the last 5 candidates sit on a table and people asked questions to them.



One interesting question was;



  • Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?

As far as I can remember, the representative of Rijndael was the last to answer, was sitting on the right end. The first 3 were simply said The Rijndael. But, the 4. person said I want 32-round Rijndael



  • Was he Bruce Schneier? See his suggest on his Blog.

  • What was the choice of the representative of Rijndael?









share|improve this question















This is a historical question. In the third AES Conference of NIST (AES3), April 13-14, 2000, New York, near the end of the conference, one representative for each of the last 5 candidates sit on a table and people asked questions to them.



One interesting question was;



  • Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?

As far as I can remember, the representative of Rijndael was the last to answer, was sitting on the right end. The first 3 were simply said The Rijndael. But, the 4. person said I want 32-round Rijndael



  • Was he Bruce Schneier? See his suggest on his Blog.

  • What was the choice of the representative of Rijndael?






aes rijndael history






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago









fgrieu

75.8k7155319




75.8k7155319










asked yesterday









kelalaka

2,864626




2,864626







  • 4




    I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
    – poncho
    yesterday







  • 1




    So, you were there, too?
    – kelalaka
    yesterday






  • 2




    Yup...…..………...
    – poncho
    yesterday










  • @kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
    – 0skar
    7 hours ago










  • @0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
    – kelalaka
    7 hours ago












  • 4




    I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
    – poncho
    yesterday







  • 1




    So, you were there, too?
    – kelalaka
    yesterday






  • 2




    Yup...…..………...
    – poncho
    yesterday










  • @kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
    – 0skar
    7 hours ago










  • @0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
    – kelalaka
    7 hours ago







4




4




I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
– poncho
yesterday





I think it may have been the representative for the Serpent team (Ross Anderson?); however it's been a while...
– poncho
yesterday





1




1




So, you were there, too?
– kelalaka
yesterday




So, you were there, too?
– kelalaka
yesterday




2




2




Yup...…..………...
– poncho
yesterday




Yup...…..………...
– poncho
yesterday












@kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
– 0skar
7 hours ago




@kelalaka Rijndael cipher was selected by NIST (==NSA), Serpent had 32 rounds and a high security margin. why Rijndael with 10-14 rounds?? Ask NSA!
– 0skar
7 hours ago












@0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
– kelalaka
7 hours ago




@0skar we are not talking about why 10 round. I want to remember historical part of the conference. It is 10 round because the designers are sure about their design?. They even did not consider 16 rounds.
– kelalaka
7 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













This answer is based on Morris Dworkin's report of the conference, so it ultimately relies on its accuracy (it is probably more reliable than memory, though).



Regarding the question "Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?", the report states (page 15):




The panelists were asked which algorithm, other than their own, they
would choose for the AES. Rijmen liked RC6; the other four panelists
said Rijndael if it was extended to 18 or more rounds.




So this suggests that the representative for Rijndael (Vincent Rijmen) chose RC6.



During his presentation at the conference, Bruce Schneier is reported to have ended with the following suggestions (page 15 as well):




He [Schneier] recommended that NIST choose either Rijndael extended to 18
rounds, Serpent, or Twofish for the AES; he favored Twofish
for its efficiency across the board, its unique flexibility, and its
speed-security tradeoff.




Since he suggested 18 rounds here, it would surprise me if he would argue for 32 rounds later the same day.



So the representative who answered "Rijndael with 32 rounds" was either Shai Halevi (MARS), Ron Rivest (RC6) or Ross Anderson (Serpent).
My personal guess would be Ross Anderson (this would make sense because Serpent has 32 rounds). In fact, on page 16 of the report there is some weak evidence pointing in this direction:




Anderson responded to a suggestion to transfer some of
Serpent’s rounds to Rijndael by reiterating his support for 32 round
Serpent with 256 bit keys.







share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
    – Aleph
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
    – fgrieu
    10 hours ago











  • @fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
    – kelalaka
    10 hours ago










  • @fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
    – Aleph
    7 hours ago










Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "281"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f63922%2fwho-said-32-round-rijndael-in-the-third-aes-conference%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
4
down vote













This answer is based on Morris Dworkin's report of the conference, so it ultimately relies on its accuracy (it is probably more reliable than memory, though).



Regarding the question "Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?", the report states (page 15):




The panelists were asked which algorithm, other than their own, they
would choose for the AES. Rijmen liked RC6; the other four panelists
said Rijndael if it was extended to 18 or more rounds.




So this suggests that the representative for Rijndael (Vincent Rijmen) chose RC6.



During his presentation at the conference, Bruce Schneier is reported to have ended with the following suggestions (page 15 as well):




He [Schneier] recommended that NIST choose either Rijndael extended to 18
rounds, Serpent, or Twofish for the AES; he favored Twofish
for its efficiency across the board, its unique flexibility, and its
speed-security tradeoff.




Since he suggested 18 rounds here, it would surprise me if he would argue for 32 rounds later the same day.



So the representative who answered "Rijndael with 32 rounds" was either Shai Halevi (MARS), Ron Rivest (RC6) or Ross Anderson (Serpent).
My personal guess would be Ross Anderson (this would make sense because Serpent has 32 rounds). In fact, on page 16 of the report there is some weak evidence pointing in this direction:




Anderson responded to a suggestion to transfer some of
Serpent’s rounds to Rijndael by reiterating his support for 32 round
Serpent with 256 bit keys.







share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
    – Aleph
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
    – fgrieu
    10 hours ago











  • @fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
    – kelalaka
    10 hours ago










  • @fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
    – Aleph
    7 hours ago














up vote
4
down vote













This answer is based on Morris Dworkin's report of the conference, so it ultimately relies on its accuracy (it is probably more reliable than memory, though).



Regarding the question "Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?", the report states (page 15):




The panelists were asked which algorithm, other than their own, they
would choose for the AES. Rijmen liked RC6; the other four panelists
said Rijndael if it was extended to 18 or more rounds.




So this suggests that the representative for Rijndael (Vincent Rijmen) chose RC6.



During his presentation at the conference, Bruce Schneier is reported to have ended with the following suggestions (page 15 as well):




He [Schneier] recommended that NIST choose either Rijndael extended to 18
rounds, Serpent, or Twofish for the AES; he favored Twofish
for its efficiency across the board, its unique flexibility, and its
speed-security tradeoff.




Since he suggested 18 rounds here, it would surprise me if he would argue for 32 rounds later the same day.



So the representative who answered "Rijndael with 32 rounds" was either Shai Halevi (MARS), Ron Rivest (RC6) or Ross Anderson (Serpent).
My personal guess would be Ross Anderson (this would make sense because Serpent has 32 rounds). In fact, on page 16 of the report there is some weak evidence pointing in this direction:




Anderson responded to a suggestion to transfer some of
Serpent’s rounds to Rijndael by reiterating his support for 32 round
Serpent with 256 bit keys.







share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
    – Aleph
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
    – fgrieu
    10 hours ago











  • @fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
    – kelalaka
    10 hours ago










  • @fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
    – Aleph
    7 hours ago












up vote
4
down vote










up vote
4
down vote









This answer is based on Morris Dworkin's report of the conference, so it ultimately relies on its accuracy (it is probably more reliable than memory, though).



Regarding the question "Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?", the report states (page 15):




The panelists were asked which algorithm, other than their own, they
would choose for the AES. Rijmen liked RC6; the other four panelists
said Rijndael if it was extended to 18 or more rounds.




So this suggests that the representative for Rijndael (Vincent Rijmen) chose RC6.



During his presentation at the conference, Bruce Schneier is reported to have ended with the following suggestions (page 15 as well):




He [Schneier] recommended that NIST choose either Rijndael extended to 18
rounds, Serpent, or Twofish for the AES; he favored Twofish
for its efficiency across the board, its unique flexibility, and its
speed-security tradeoff.




Since he suggested 18 rounds here, it would surprise me if he would argue for 32 rounds later the same day.



So the representative who answered "Rijndael with 32 rounds" was either Shai Halevi (MARS), Ron Rivest (RC6) or Ross Anderson (Serpent).
My personal guess would be Ross Anderson (this would make sense because Serpent has 32 rounds). In fact, on page 16 of the report there is some weak evidence pointing in this direction:




Anderson responded to a suggestion to transfer some of
Serpent’s rounds to Rijndael by reiterating his support for 32 round
Serpent with 256 bit keys.







share|improve this answer














This answer is based on Morris Dworkin's report of the conference, so it ultimately relies on its accuracy (it is probably more reliable than memory, though).



Regarding the question "Except for your proposal for AES, what is your candidate?", the report states (page 15):




The panelists were asked which algorithm, other than their own, they
would choose for the AES. Rijmen liked RC6; the other four panelists
said Rijndael if it was extended to 18 or more rounds.




So this suggests that the representative for Rijndael (Vincent Rijmen) chose RC6.



During his presentation at the conference, Bruce Schneier is reported to have ended with the following suggestions (page 15 as well):




He [Schneier] recommended that NIST choose either Rijndael extended to 18
rounds, Serpent, or Twofish for the AES; he favored Twofish
for its efficiency across the board, its unique flexibility, and its
speed-security tradeoff.




Since he suggested 18 rounds here, it would surprise me if he would argue for 32 rounds later the same day.



So the representative who answered "Rijndael with 32 rounds" was either Shai Halevi (MARS), Ron Rivest (RC6) or Ross Anderson (Serpent).
My personal guess would be Ross Anderson (this would make sense because Serpent has 32 rounds). In fact, on page 16 of the report there is some weak evidence pointing in this direction:




Anderson responded to a suggestion to transfer some of
Serpent’s rounds to Rijndael by reiterating his support for 32 round
Serpent with 256 bit keys.








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 10 hours ago

























answered 10 hours ago









Aleph

904816




904816







  • 1




    It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
    – Aleph
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
    – fgrieu
    10 hours ago











  • @fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
    – kelalaka
    10 hours ago










  • @fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
    – Aleph
    7 hours ago












  • 1




    It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
    – Aleph
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
    – fgrieu
    10 hours ago











  • @fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
    – kelalaka
    10 hours ago










  • @fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
    – Aleph
    7 hours ago







1




1




It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
– Aleph
10 hours ago




It would be nice to hear from people who were at the conference whether or not this roughly corresponds to what they remember.
– Aleph
10 hours ago




1




1




It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
– fgrieu
10 hours ago





It looks like consensus was on Rijndael extended to 18 rounds, and we got Rijndael with 10, 12 or 14 rounds. That's bait for conspiracy theorists.
– fgrieu
10 hours ago













@fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
– kelalaka
10 hours ago




@fgrieu Well, I remember that people are not satisfied with the 10 rounds, considering the future security.
– kelalaka
10 hours ago












@fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
– Aleph
7 hours ago




@fgrieu The consensus among the authors of competing submissions ;). I can imagine a few reasons why they wouldn't have recommended Rijndael outright...
– Aleph
7 hours ago

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f63922%2fwho-said-32-round-rijndael-in-the-third-aes-conference%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































Popular posts from this blog

How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

Bahrain

Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay