Talk:Symmetric-key algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:57, 1 December 2013

Latest revision as of 19:37, 30 July 2025

(17 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject Cryptographybanner shell|class=startStart|importancevital=Topyes|computer-science-importance1=High}}

{{WikiProject Cryptography|importance=Top|computer-science-importance=High}}

}}

{{Copied|from=Reciprocal cipher|from_oldid=594888807|to=Symmetric-key algorithm|to_oldid=694433513|to_diff=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Symmetric-key_algorithm&diff=prev&oldid=694433513}}

==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==

[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2021-08-24">24 August 2021</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2021-12-11">11 December 2021</span>. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_of_New_Haven/Seminar_in_Academic_Inquiry_and_Writing_(Fall_2021)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:CodeBreakNight|CodeBreakNight]].

{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 10:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}}

==Untitled==

Re: Statement "The symmetric-key algorithms can't be used for authentication or non-repudiation purposes."

Isn't authentication possible, using a KDC?

Line 17 ⟶ 25:

The word "quality" unmodified has no meaning in this sentence. It is like saying "the plane was flying at an altitude." If it is off the ground, it has altitude, but, unmodified, gives no information on how far off the ground. High altitude? Low altitude? I believe you are trying to say "high quality." If this is so, may I suggest saying so?

[[User:Kjdamrau|Kjdamrau]] 06:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)Ken Damrau

:''Quality'' is often used by itself in colloquial English and some journalistic writing to mean ''(of) good quality''. The word ''good'' would probably be better here. [[User:Koro Neil|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil|talk]]) 01:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

== Content yet lacking depth ==

Line 52 ⟶ 62:

The line, "It is possible to encrypt without using any fixed algorithm. Non-Algorithmic Encryption[5]" contains a link to a page which offers products for sale. The phrase "Non-Algorithmic Encryption" seems to me to be a contradiction in terms and may possibly be a trademark belonging to a Swedish company called TRNG98. [[User:JLKrause|JLKrause]] ([[User talk:JLKrause|talk]]) 03:41, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

: Moreover, there is a lack of secondary sources [[WP:OR]]. Typically, encryption schemes on Wikipedia should have been published (i.e. peer reviewed) and analyzed. 05:42, 26 July 2013 (UTC) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2A02:1205:C6BB:6880:A0CE:5BE0:C90E:6766|2A02:1205:C6BB:6880:A0CE:5BE0:C90E:6766]] ([[User talk:2A02:1205:C6BB:6880:A0CE:5BE0:C90E:6766|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== removed "well-respected" from "Implementations" ==

RC4 is mentioned and is not "well-respected" nowadays! has been known to be insecure for _years_. source: ivan ristic, bulletproof SSL, feistyduck.com.

from a historic point of view RC4 deserves respect for sure - but any statement to that regard would have to be specific enough not to lead readers to think RC4 is still considered secure as of today. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/37.209.180.8|37.209.180.8]] ([[User talk:37.209.180.8|talk]]) 14:17, 11 June 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Merging and redirecting [[Reciprocal cipher]] ==

I am [[WP:BOLD|BOLDly]] implementing the proposed merge of [[Reciprocal cipher]] into this page ([[Symmetric-key algorithm]]) from [[Special:Diff/470191675|January 2012]], having seen no objection under [[WP:MERGECLOSE]]. Please feel free to reopen discussion on this if you think that's needed. Thanks, '''[[User:L235|L235]]''' ([[User talk:L235#top|t]] / [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]] / [[User:L235/siginfo|<small>ping in reply</small>]]) 06:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

:Done. '''[[User:L235|L235]]''' ([[User talk:L235#top|t]] / [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]] / [[User:L235/siginfo|<small>ping in reply</small>]]) 06:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Telegramy [[User:Petridahura1|Petridahura1]] ([[User talk:Petridahura1|talk]]) 23:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

== Securing Local Data ==

While the article on asymmetric or public key cryptography lays an emphasis on securing communication channels, here, you also talk about sharing keys. I am missing information which allows to classify and qualify encryption systems for use on locally stored data. Currently there is no easy way to deduce that symmetric algorithms should be preferable in such a context.

TIA --[[User:Psycho Chicken|Psycho Chicken]] ([[User talk:Psycho Chicken|talk]]) 05:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

== Use of ''let'' ==

''Let, the character is “T”.<p>

''Step 4: Let 1000 as divisor''.<p>

I suspect English is not the writer's first language. [[User:Koro Neil|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil|talk]]) 01:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

== One-time pad? ==

Isn't a one-time pad a symmetric cipher? If so it isn't mentioned here. [[User:RichardAlexanderHall|RichardAlexanderHall]] ([[User talk:RichardAlexanderHall|talk]]) 16:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

:Technically it is -- the keys on both sides are the same, however it is not really a practical example, since the shared secret is very large. Do you think it makes sense to use it as an example? [[User:Namnatulco|Namnatulco]] ([[User talk:Namnatulco|talk]]) 14:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

:: I agree that the one-time pad is a kind of symmetric cipher, and should be mentioned here. I see that it's currently very briefly mentioned. Perhaps a few more words may be useful.

:: I fail to see why [[User:Namnatulco|Namnatulco]] feels one-time pad is "not really practical", since the [[one-time pad]] article has a long list of examples of its use in practice -- clearly those users feel it is practical. --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] ([[User talk:DavidCary|talk]]) 19:37, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

== About history and differences between algorithm and cryptography ==

I have a couple of sources that would give more of the history/evolution of symmetric-key cryptography. Do you think that would fit here? If not, where do you think it could go? I was wondering because symmetric-key cryptography (I believe) redirects to here.[[User:CodeBreakNight|CodeBreakNight]] ([[User talk:CodeBreakNight|talk]]) 17:14, 2 December 2021 (UTC)