Author pitrou
Recipients Arfrever, alex, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, dstufft, ezio.melotti, jcea, lemburg, markk, ncoghlan, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, vstinner
Date 2014-04-23.13:34:10
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1398260048.2295.12.camel@fsol>
In-reply-to <1398259439.17.0.192512394523.issue20995@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> For any device that has hardware support for AES (AES-NI) AES-GCM is
> hands down a better choice of cipher. It is secure, has no issues in
> the spec itself, and it is *fast*, like 900MB/s for AES-128-GCM on a
> Sandy Bridge Xeon w/ AES-NI (ChaCha20Poly1305 got 500MB/s on the same
> hardware, however it is a 256bit cipher will AES-128-GCM is a 128 bit
> cipher). Using ChaCha20 on those devices would be a worse choice than
> AES-GCM.

I think performance isn't really relevant, except perhaps on very busy
servers. A smartphone acting as a *client* certainly shouldn't need to
download 20 MB/s of encrypted data.
History
Date User Action Args
2014-04-23 13:34:11pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, lemburg, jcea, ncoghlan, vstinner, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, Arfrever, alex, r.david.murray, python-dev, dstufft, markk
2014-04-23 13:34:10pitroulinkissue20995 messages
2014-04-23 13:34:10pitroucreate