Will AES-256 ever be brute forceable?

Will AES-256 ever be brute forceable?

Attached: VeraCrypt_Logo.svg.png (1200x985, 81.97K)

Ever is a long time, so I'm going to say yes.

I tried using a portable version for windows recently and windows defender instantly started doing some shit that prevents the virtual disks from being unmounted. Reading veracrypt's intall manual it suggests that being forced to close the program before unmounting keeps vc active in RAM which requires a hard restart to clear.

Is there any practical way of making veracrypt work for windows or should I just kill myself?

install gentoo

Probably eventually. This is why the NSA is coming out with a new encryption standard soon. Computers are fast enough to handle something more complex, and in cryptography its generally best to stay decades ahead of actual attacks that can decrypt real-world data.

>Is there any practical way of making veracrypt work for windows or should I just kill myself?
Add an exception to Defender? Idk it just works for me.

>This is why the NSA is coming out with a new encryption standard soon
Will they still support DUAL_EC_DRBG? Because I rely on that for all my random number generation.

I think its specifically because i'm trying to use a portable version

Probably. That makes it harder for it to load and unload its driver. I installed it.

>Will AES-256 ever be brute forceable?

Wait, so you're telling me you actually believe those gpu that are use in crypto scam are actually legit being use to farm crypto and not for botnet bruteforce?

>botnet bruteforce ??
yeah like its been widely known gpu's are better for bruteforce than a cpu.

Attached: 1632181966721.png (637x772, 91.08K)

Use bitlocker and stop being a schizo

Actually serpent is the real unbreakable AES. That's why they chose the method you now know as AES over serpent in the AES "contest". Go research it if you don't believe me.

AES was about be faster than 3DES.

hahaha why the fuck do you think I would EVER follow guidance on cryptography from the agency that has the most investment in weakening and eliminating encryption? fuck the NSA and fuck their backdoor curves

>schizo wojak
kys

What about AES-512?

Serpent was technically more secure but AES was faster and easier to implement, which were two big upsides for the algorithm that was going to be a worldwide standard. I guess if you want to don your tinfoil hat you can believe it was chosen because it was "more breakable".

A key size of 512 bits is not defined in the standard, only 128, 192 and 256. There's not much need to go larger, if AES is broken the key size likely won't matter anyway.

why you using it on windows? veracrypt is for thumb drives that arent even ntfs, fat32 or exfat typically. for everything else there is luks. and it's pointless to encrypt windows

cool. im excited to read the source code when nsa will release it. i hope it's as good as twofish cypher

could you elaborate on why using luks?

>and it's pointless to encrypt windows
why?