Crackabiltiy of OpenSSL, GPG, bcrypt and scrypt

[gk]

I hope I am making an apples to apples comparison.

I'm not talking about Debian's mess up awhile back. Nor am I talking about  
something that was flying around Debian's mailing list for OpenSSL,  
FUSE/ENCFS and AES ciphers.


I'm talking overall. Which is the most stable, has the highest probability  
of not be broken in our lifetimes (20 yrs). Mainly I'm trying to center in  
on file management, not email. GPG is good for email, but I find that  
using OpenSSL is actually easier because it is by default installed on  
*nix boxen, AND is VERY VERY easily installed on M$ products compared to  
the massive hoops that have to be done for GPG on the later that even a  
well versed Linux user would be pressed to install right.

scrypt claims it is much more difficult in its derivations than bcrypt  
which is 448 bit Blowfish. Thereby saying it is harder to "crack".  
However, I can not find anything on scrypt that says what type of  
encryption method it uses much less bit value.

So if you had a face off between OpenSSL, GPG and scrypt for file  
encryption. Let me say bcrypt has some funky responses once in a while to  
extra large files, ie > 4gb. Which to use?


gk

-- 
Remember, it's not that we have something to hide; it's that we have  
nothing to show.

--Keep tunneling.