Why does AES have exactly 10 rounds for a 128-bit key, 12 for 192 bits and 14 for a 256-bit key size?Increase number of rounds for SPN and Feistel ciphersIs AES-256 weaker than 192 and 128 bit versions?What is the security loss from reducing Rijndael to 128 bits block size from 256 bits?Can Poly1305-AES be used with AES-256?What are the constraints on using GCM with a tag size of 96 and 128 bits?AES - What is the advantage of a 256-bit key with a 128-bit block cipher?AES function with 128 bit key and 128 bit input size - does it have perfect secrecy?Replacing a block cipher's key schedule with a stream cipherA Lightweight Matrix Suggestion for MixColumns State of AESOCB-AES: Ambiguous definition of “Encipher” in RFC document

How does buying out courses with grant money work?

How does Loki do this?

Describing a person. What needs to be mentioned?

Tiptoe or tiphoof? Adjusting words to better fit fantasy races

What is the intuitive meaning of having a linear relationship between the logs of two variables?

Would this custom Sorcerer variant that can only learn any verbal-component-only spell be unbalanced?

Implement the Thanos sorting algorithm

Is the destination of a commercial flight important for the pilot?

Is oxalic acid dihydrate considered a primary acid standard in analytical chemistry?

How can a function with a hole (removable discontinuity) equal a function with no hole?

Do sorcerers' Subtle Spells require a skill check to be unseen?

How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?

Would a high gravity rocky planet be guaranteed to have an atmosphere?

Opposite of a diet

Was Spock the First Vulcan in Starfleet?

Hostile work environment after whistle-blowing on coworker and our boss. What do I do?

What does "I’d sit this one out, Cap," imply or mean in the context?

Is exact Kanji stroke length important?

A Rare Riley Riddle

Why escape if the_content isnt?

How to pronounce the slash sign

How can I quit an app using Terminal?

Did Dumbledore lie to Harry about how long he had James Potter's invisibility cloak when he was examining it? If so, why?

What is the best translation for "slot" in the context of multiplayer video games?



Why does AES have exactly 10 rounds for a 128-bit key, 12 for 192 bits and 14 for a 256-bit key size?


Increase number of rounds for SPN and Feistel ciphersIs AES-256 weaker than 192 and 128 bit versions?What is the security loss from reducing Rijndael to 128 bits block size from 256 bits?Can Poly1305-AES be used with AES-256?What are the constraints on using GCM with a tag size of 96 and 128 bits?AES - What is the advantage of a 256-bit key with a 128-bit block cipher?AES function with 128 bit key and 128 bit input size - does it have perfect secrecy?Replacing a block cipher's key schedule with a stream cipherA Lightweight Matrix Suggestion for MixColumns State of AESOCB-AES: Ambiguous definition of “Encipher” in RFC document













23












$begingroup$


I was reading about the AES algorithm to be used in one of our projects and found that the exact number of rounds is fixed in AES for specific key sizes:



$$
beginarrayc
hline
beginarrayc textbfKey Size \ left(textbitsright) endarray
&beginarrayc textbfRounds \ left(textnumberright) endarray \ hline
128 & 10 \ hline
192 & 12 \ hline
256 & 14 \ hline
endarray
$$



Why these specific numbers of rounds only?










share|improve this question









New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
    $endgroup$
    – Maarten Bodewes
    Mar 24 at 13:32















23












$begingroup$


I was reading about the AES algorithm to be used in one of our projects and found that the exact number of rounds is fixed in AES for specific key sizes:



$$
beginarrayc
hline
beginarrayc textbfKey Size \ left(textbitsright) endarray
&beginarrayc textbfRounds \ left(textnumberright) endarray \ hline
128 & 10 \ hline
192 & 12 \ hline
256 & 14 \ hline
endarray
$$



Why these specific numbers of rounds only?










share|improve this question









New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
    $endgroup$
    – Maarten Bodewes
    Mar 24 at 13:32













23












23








23


4



$begingroup$


I was reading about the AES algorithm to be used in one of our projects and found that the exact number of rounds is fixed in AES for specific key sizes:



$$
beginarrayc
hline
beginarrayc textbfKey Size \ left(textbitsright) endarray
&beginarrayc textbfRounds \ left(textnumberright) endarray \ hline
128 & 10 \ hline
192 & 12 \ hline
256 & 14 \ hline
endarray
$$



Why these specific numbers of rounds only?










share|improve this question









New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I was reading about the AES algorithm to be used in one of our projects and found that the exact number of rounds is fixed in AES for specific key sizes:



$$
beginarrayc
hline
beginarrayc textbfKey Size \ left(textbitsright) endarray
&beginarrayc textbfRounds \ left(textnumberright) endarray \ hline
128 & 10 \ hline
192 & 12 \ hline
256 & 14 \ hline
endarray
$$



Why these specific numbers of rounds only?







aes






share|improve this question









New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 21 at 23:58









Nat

2081411




2081411






New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked Mar 21 at 19:36









kapilkapil

11816




11816




New contributor




kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






kapil is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
    $endgroup$
    – Maarten Bodewes
    Mar 24 at 13:32
















  • $begingroup$
    Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
    $endgroup$
    – Maarten Bodewes
    Mar 24 at 13:32















$begingroup$
Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes
Mar 24 at 13:32




$begingroup$
Note that AES is a subset of the Rijndael cipher. The same number of rounds are applicable for Rijndael, but there are more options available depending on key size and block size (AES has just one block size: 128 bits and 3 key sizes, Rijndael has 3 block sizes and 5 key sizes, and therefore 15 combinations of both, rather than just the 3 for AES).
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes
Mar 24 at 13:32










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















31












$begingroup$

Why these specific number of rounds only?



Because AES is a standard; AES is an acronym for "Advanced Encryption Standard".



The standard specifies these specific number of rounds to ensure that different implementations are interoperable.



Why not more or less?



The reason these specific numbers of rounds were chosen was a choice of the designers. They did a lot of math to determine that these were the sweet spot between sufficient security and optimal performance.



Less might be insecure, and more might be slower with no benefit.



To quote the above book (from Section 3.5 The Number of Rounds):




For Rijndael versions with a longer key, the number of rounds was raised by one for every additional 32 bits in the cipher key. This was done for the following reasons:



  1. One of the main objectives is the absence of shortcut attacks, i.e. attacks that are more efficient than an exhaustive key search. Since the workload of an exhaustive key search grows with the key length, shortcut attacks can afford to be less efficient for longer keys.


  2. (Partially) known-key and related-key attacks exploit the knowledge of cipher key bits or the ability to apply different cipher keys. If the cipher key grows, the range of possibilities available to the cryptanalyst increases.







share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
    $endgroup$
    – kasperd
    Mar 22 at 10:58










  • $begingroup$
    @kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin Bonner
    Mar 22 at 12:14







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
    $endgroup$
    – forest
    Mar 22 at 22:44











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "281"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






kapil is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f68199%2fwhy-does-aes-have-exactly-10-rounds-for-a-128-bit-key-12-for-192-bits-and-14-fo%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









31












$begingroup$

Why these specific number of rounds only?



Because AES is a standard; AES is an acronym for "Advanced Encryption Standard".



The standard specifies these specific number of rounds to ensure that different implementations are interoperable.



Why not more or less?



The reason these specific numbers of rounds were chosen was a choice of the designers. They did a lot of math to determine that these were the sweet spot between sufficient security and optimal performance.



Less might be insecure, and more might be slower with no benefit.



To quote the above book (from Section 3.5 The Number of Rounds):




For Rijndael versions with a longer key, the number of rounds was raised by one for every additional 32 bits in the cipher key. This was done for the following reasons:



  1. One of the main objectives is the absence of shortcut attacks, i.e. attacks that are more efficient than an exhaustive key search. Since the workload of an exhaustive key search grows with the key length, shortcut attacks can afford to be less efficient for longer keys.


  2. (Partially) known-key and related-key attacks exploit the knowledge of cipher key bits or the ability to apply different cipher keys. If the cipher key grows, the range of possibilities available to the cryptanalyst increases.







share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
    $endgroup$
    – kasperd
    Mar 22 at 10:58










  • $begingroup$
    @kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin Bonner
    Mar 22 at 12:14







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
    $endgroup$
    – forest
    Mar 22 at 22:44
















31












$begingroup$

Why these specific number of rounds only?



Because AES is a standard; AES is an acronym for "Advanced Encryption Standard".



The standard specifies these specific number of rounds to ensure that different implementations are interoperable.



Why not more or less?



The reason these specific numbers of rounds were chosen was a choice of the designers. They did a lot of math to determine that these were the sweet spot between sufficient security and optimal performance.



Less might be insecure, and more might be slower with no benefit.



To quote the above book (from Section 3.5 The Number of Rounds):




For Rijndael versions with a longer key, the number of rounds was raised by one for every additional 32 bits in the cipher key. This was done for the following reasons:



  1. One of the main objectives is the absence of shortcut attacks, i.e. attacks that are more efficient than an exhaustive key search. Since the workload of an exhaustive key search grows with the key length, shortcut attacks can afford to be less efficient for longer keys.


  2. (Partially) known-key and related-key attacks exploit the knowledge of cipher key bits or the ability to apply different cipher keys. If the cipher key grows, the range of possibilities available to the cryptanalyst increases.







share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
    $endgroup$
    – kasperd
    Mar 22 at 10:58










  • $begingroup$
    @kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin Bonner
    Mar 22 at 12:14







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
    $endgroup$
    – forest
    Mar 22 at 22:44














31












31








31





$begingroup$

Why these specific number of rounds only?



Because AES is a standard; AES is an acronym for "Advanced Encryption Standard".



The standard specifies these specific number of rounds to ensure that different implementations are interoperable.



Why not more or less?



The reason these specific numbers of rounds were chosen was a choice of the designers. They did a lot of math to determine that these were the sweet spot between sufficient security and optimal performance.



Less might be insecure, and more might be slower with no benefit.



To quote the above book (from Section 3.5 The Number of Rounds):




For Rijndael versions with a longer key, the number of rounds was raised by one for every additional 32 bits in the cipher key. This was done for the following reasons:



  1. One of the main objectives is the absence of shortcut attacks, i.e. attacks that are more efficient than an exhaustive key search. Since the workload of an exhaustive key search grows with the key length, shortcut attacks can afford to be less efficient for longer keys.


  2. (Partially) known-key and related-key attacks exploit the knowledge of cipher key bits or the ability to apply different cipher keys. If the cipher key grows, the range of possibilities available to the cryptanalyst increases.







share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Why these specific number of rounds only?



Because AES is a standard; AES is an acronym for "Advanced Encryption Standard".



The standard specifies these specific number of rounds to ensure that different implementations are interoperable.



Why not more or less?



The reason these specific numbers of rounds were chosen was a choice of the designers. They did a lot of math to determine that these were the sweet spot between sufficient security and optimal performance.



Less might be insecure, and more might be slower with no benefit.



To quote the above book (from Section 3.5 The Number of Rounds):




For Rijndael versions with a longer key, the number of rounds was raised by one for every additional 32 bits in the cipher key. This was done for the following reasons:



  1. One of the main objectives is the absence of shortcut attacks, i.e. attacks that are more efficient than an exhaustive key search. Since the workload of an exhaustive key search grows with the key length, shortcut attacks can afford to be less efficient for longer keys.


  2. (Partially) known-key and related-key attacks exploit the knowledge of cipher key bits or the ability to apply different cipher keys. If the cipher key grows, the range of possibilities available to the cryptanalyst increases.








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Mar 21 at 21:20









puzzlepalace

2,9101133




2,9101133










answered Mar 21 at 19:51









Ella RoseElla Rose

16.7k44482




16.7k44482







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
    $endgroup$
    – kasperd
    Mar 22 at 10:58










  • $begingroup$
    @kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin Bonner
    Mar 22 at 12:14







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
    $endgroup$
    – forest
    Mar 22 at 22:44













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
    $endgroup$
    – kasperd
    Mar 22 at 10:58










  • $begingroup$
    @kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
    $endgroup$
    – Martin Bonner
    Mar 22 at 12:14







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
    $endgroup$
    – forest
    Mar 22 at 22:44








1




1




$begingroup$
That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
$endgroup$
– kasperd
Mar 22 at 10:58




$begingroup$
That quote only explains why with longer keys the number of rounds is higher. It does not explain why exactly the 128 bit version uses 10 rounds. The reason for the 10 rounds (which I could misrebemmer since it has been almost 20 years) is as follows: The security against all known attacks was analyzed and 6 rounds was found to be enough against attacks known at the time. It takes 2 rounds to achieve a full avalanche effect in AES, so 10 rounds corresponds to enough rounds for a full avalanche effect before and after the 6 rounds needed for security against known attacks.
$endgroup$
– kasperd
Mar 22 at 10:58












$begingroup$
@kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Mar 22 at 12:14





$begingroup$
@kasperd I think it was 6 rounds at the time + 2 rounds because attacks only get better + 2 rounds for full avalanche.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Mar 22 at 12:14





1




1




$begingroup$
@MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
$endgroup$
– forest
Mar 22 at 22:44





$begingroup$
@MartinBonner The way the paper described it was "so it can be thought of as padding the vulnerable 6 rounds with two full diffusion steps" or something along those lines, as kasperd says.
$endgroup$
– forest
Mar 22 at 22:44











kapil is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















kapil is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












kapil is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











kapil is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Cryptography Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f68199%2fwhy-does-aes-have-exactly-10-rounds-for-a-128-bit-key-12-for-192-bits-and-14-fo%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Adding axes to figuresAdding axes labels to LaTeX figuresLaTeX equivalent of ConTeXt buffersRotate a node but not its content: the case of the ellipse decorationHow to define the default vertical distance between nodes?TikZ scaling graphic and adjust node position and keep font sizeNumerical conditional within tikz keys?adding axes to shapesAlign axes across subfiguresAdding figures with a certain orderLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themAdding axes labels to LaTeX figures

Tähtien Talli Jäsenet | Lähteet | NavigointivalikkoSuomen Hippos – Tähtien Talli

Do these cracks on my tires look bad? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowDry rot tire should I replace?Having to replace tiresFishtailed so easily? Bad tires? ABS?Filling the tires with something other than air, to avoid puncture hassles?Used Michelin tires safe to install?Do these tyre cracks necessitate replacement?Rumbling noise: tires or mechanicalIs it possible to fix noisy feathered tires?Are bad winter tires still better than summer tires in winter?Torque converter failure - Related to replacing only 2 tires?Why use snow tires on all 4 wheels on 2-wheel-drive cars?