Score:1

FF1 comparison with FF3

br flag

I have seen the FF1 and FF3 Format preserving encryption. There are certain differences with respect to a number of rounds and while using the unbalanced Feistel network. What makes it different for FF3 attacks to work also on FF1?

In Durak et al. paper 2017 they mention the attack specific to only FF3. Why is it so?

Paper reference: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/521.pdf

Maarten Bodewes avatar
in flag
You are both claiming that attacks on FF3 also work on FF1 **and** the opposite, that an attack is specific to FF3. Which one is it?
Novice_researcher avatar
br flag
Actually what I meant was there are papers that state the attacks work both on FF1 and FF3. While certain papers( like Durak et al.) mention that attack is specific to only FF3. I did not get the point why they restrict to FF3 attack only as FF1 and FF3 are similar.
vn flag
This is just because the attacks work in a different way. For example, the Durak et al. attack relies on a very specific problem with the tweak schedule. Yes, FF1 and FF3 are similar, but minor differences can have enormous consequences.
mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.