[10640] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Stewart)
Thu Mar 28 18:14:21 2002
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20020325231829.02684b30@idiom.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 23:39:21 -0800
To: "Lucky Green" <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
Cc: <cypherpunks@lne.com>, cryptography@wasabisystems.com
In-Reply-To: <00cc01c1d2d4$ad3bc640$c33a080a@LUCKYVAIO>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 05:38 PM 03/23/2002 -0800, Lucky Green wrote:
>While the latter doesn't warrant comment, one question to ask
>spokespersons pitching the former is "what key size is the majority of
>your customers using with your security product"? Having worked in this
>industry for over a decade, I can state without qualification that
>anybody other than perhaps some of the HSM vendors would be misinformed
>if they claimed that the majority - or even a sizable minority - of
>their customers have deployed key sizes larger than 1024-bits through
>their organization. Which is not surprising, since many vendor offerings
>fail to support larger keys.
While SSL implementations are mostly 1024 bits these days,
aren't PGP Diffie-Hellman keys usually 1536 bits?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
