🚀 go-pugleaf

         William Hugh Murphy said (regarding triple des encryption)
>If you were not trying to solve the special problem of backward
>compatibility, you would likely use two encrypt steps.  This would
>give the same protection and only double the time.

         Actually there is a "meet in the middle" attack against double
des encryption which takes time 2**56 (albeit using space 2**56).  So
far as I know, there is no similar way of attacking IBM's triple des
scheme.  So in this respect at least the triple scheme is stronger.
                          James B. Shearer