[147293] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] RSA equivalent key length/strength
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Gutmann)
Wed Sep 25 18:24:20 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:28:40 +1200
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
To: code@funwithsoftware.org, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie
In-Reply-To: <523F303C.1040800@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com, adam@cypherspace.org, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org,
zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk, perry@piermont.com
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> writes:
>That's a mischaracterisation I think. Some folks (incl. me) have said that
>1024 DHE is arguably better that no PFS and if current deployments mean we
>can't ubiquitously do better, then we should recommend that as an option,
>while at the same time recognising that 1024 is relatively short.
+1.
Peter.
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
