12-23-2012, 10:46 PM
I'm sorry, I just assumed that since you provided absolutely no context, and since you posted it to the Support forum, that this somehow related to password cracking.
In short, if you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't be using Blowfish EBC with a 96 bit key. And you wouldn't be asking us if it were any good. What you have right now could be broken very quickly, even without knowledge of the function used.
If you are actually aware of the ECB "discussion," then you would know that ECB is a complete joke and provides very little confidentiality. The two images of Tux in this Wikipedia article do a great job of illustrating how ECB leaks data, and why ECB is never to be used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECB_mode#El..._.28ECB.29
You also didn't answer my question: why Blowfish? Blowfish has been deprecated by Twofish, so why not use it? Or why not use a stronger alternative to either of them, such as AES or Camellia? If you want to be taken seriously, use AES-256-CBC or Camellia-256-CBC.
In short, if you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't be using Blowfish EBC with a 96 bit key. And you wouldn't be asking us if it were any good. What you have right now could be broken very quickly, even without knowledge of the function used.
If you are actually aware of the ECB "discussion," then you would know that ECB is a complete joke and provides very little confidentiality. The two images of Tux in this Wikipedia article do a great job of illustrating how ECB leaks data, and why ECB is never to be used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECB_mode#El..._.28ECB.29
You also didn't answer my question: why Blowfish? Blowfish has been deprecated by Twofish, so why not use it? Or why not use a stronger alternative to either of them, such as AES or Camellia? If you want to be taken seriously, use AES-256-CBC or Camellia-256-CBC.