[147278] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] RSA equivalent key length/strength
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Gutmann)
Tue Sep 24 09:45:12 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:47:45 +1200
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
To: adam@cypherspace.org, code@funwithsoftware.org
In-Reply-To: <523E34A6.2010004@funwithsoftware.org>
Cc: zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk, cryptography@metzdowd.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org,
perry@piermont.com
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
Patrick Pelletier <code@funwithsoftware.org> writes:
>I'm inclined to agree with you, but you might be interested/horrified in the
>"1024 bits is enough for anyone" debate currently unfolding on the TLS list:
That's rather misrepresenting the situation. It's a debate between two
groups, the security practitioners, "we'd like a PFS solution as soon as we
can, and given currently-deployed infrastructure DH-1024 seems to be the best
bet", and the theoreticians, "only a theoretically perfect solution is
acceptable, even if it takes us forever to get it".
(You can guess from that which side I'm on).
Peter.
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
