Power Admin
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Otto - *024 bit RSA keys crackable?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    218

    Otto - *024 bit RSA keys crackable?

    Good to see you on the ***rd Otto.

    What do you think of this?

    [url]http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2002-0*/0*06.html[/url]
    Blacksheep

  2. #2
    Unreggie Guest

    is there a typo here?

    "The security implications of a practical breakability of *024-bit RSA
    and DH keys are staggering, since of the following systems as currently
    deployed tend to utilize keys larger than *024-bits:

    - HTTPS
    - SSH
    - IPSec
    - S/MIME
    - PGP "

    Shouldn't that read "since none of the following..."?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    218

    proof read

    Yep, I think you are correct - I didn't proof read it.
    Blacksheep

  4. #4
    Otto Guest

    Re: Otto - *024 bit RSA keys crackable?

    Hello Blacksheep,

    Originally posted by Blacksheep
    Good to see you on the ***rd Otto.

    What do you think of this?

    [url]http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2002-0*/0*06.html[/url]
    I guess think just what everyone else thinks of this:

    (a) It's scary, because you can change your own PGP keys, but you can't tell the owner of a secure web store (or any other site / program using 5*2-bit SSL) to upgrade today.

    (b) It's time to use 40*6-bit keys unless you're already using them. At least you can keep your e-mail secure.


    Regards,
    Otto

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    398
    HI BLACK SHEEP,

    here is a good reading to ur query.

    [url]http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/technotes/bernstein.html#*[/url]

    Regards Data.

    I'm the green hornet,hehe....

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    6

    Thumbs up

    (b) It's time to use 40*6-bit keys unless you're already using them. At least you can keep your e-mail secure.

    Regards,
    Otto

    no comments .


    DATA
    Senior Member

    Registered: Jun 200*
    Location: ind
    Posts: 2*0
    HI BLACK SHEEP,

    here is a good reading to ur query.

    [url]http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/...ernstein.html#*[/url]

    Regards Data.


    er, but what 'bout us, moderate human beings .

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    398
    HI,

    HERE IS a post by adam

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I'd just like to make a few comments about the apparently unnoticed or
    unstated conflicts of interest and bias in the analysis surrounding
    Bernstein's proposal.

    The following is not intended to trample on anyone's ego -- but I
    think deserves saying.

    - I'm not sure any of the respondents so far except Bernstein have
    truly understood the math -- there are probably few who do, factoring
    being such a narrow research area.

    - Dan Bernstein stated that it is not easy to estimate the constants
    involved to know whether the asymptotic result affects currently used
    key sizes; he stated that the conclusion should be considered unknown
    until experimental evidence is gained.

    - Nicko van Someren -- the person ******ed with originally making the
    exaggerated, or at least highly worst case interpretation at the FC02
    panel -- has a conflict interest -- hardware accelerator gear that
    ncipher sell will be more markedly needed if people switch to 2048 or
    larger keys. Nicko has made no public comments in the resulting
    discussion.

    - Ian Goldberg also on the panel quickly distanced himself from van
    Someren's claim, as Lucky's earlier mail could have been read to imply
    Goldberg had also agreed with van Someren's claim.

    - RSA's FAQ down playing the result seems relatively balanced though
    they have an incentive to downplay the potential of Bernstein's
    approach. They have a history of producing biased FAQs: for example
    previously the ECC FAQ where they compared ECC unfavorably to RSA.
    The FAQ was removed after they licensed tech from certicom and
    included ECC in BSAFE.

    - Bob Silverman, former RSA factoring expert, observes on sci.crypt,
    quote:

    > At this point, there is noone left at RSA Labs who has the expertise
    > or knowledge to judge Bernstein's work.

    - Bruce Schneier's somewhat downplaying comments, as far as I know
    Bruce isn't an expert on factoring and he doesn't ****** anyone who is
    in his report. Bruce's comments lately seem to have lost much of
    their earlier objectivity -- many of his security newsletters lately
    seem to contain healthy doses of adverts for counterpane's managed
    security offering, and calls for lobbying and laws requiring companies
    to use such products for insurance eligibility.

    - Lucky on the other hand s***ested a practical security engineering
    approach to start to plan for possibility of migrating to larger key
    sizes. Already one SSH implementation added a configuration option to
    select a minimum key size accepted by servers as a result. This seems
    like a positive outcome. Generally the s***estion to move to 2048 bit
    keys seems like a good idea to me. Somewhat like MD5 -> SHA*, MD5
    isn't broken for most applications but it is potentially tainted by a
    partial result. Similarly I would concur with Lucky that it's prudent
    security engineering to use 2048 bit keys in new systems.
    Historically for example PGP has had similar migrations from minimum
    listed key sizes for casual use from 5*2 -> 768 -> *024 over the
    years. The progression to 2048 is probably not a bad idea given
    current entry level computer speeds and possibility of Bernstein's
    approach yeilding an improvement in factoring.

    The mocking tone of recent posts about Lucky's call seems quite
    misplaced given the checkered bias and questionable authority of the
    above conflicting claims we've seen quoted.

    Adam
    --

    oops- I am modereate human too.
    regards Data.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. bump keys
    By mid3vildan in forum General discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-19-2008, 08:01 PM
  2. 2^*024 Decimal Precision
    By SyntaXmasteR in forum Programming
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-21-2008, 05:53 PM
  3. PHP question involving shortcut keys
    By Moonbat in forum Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-10-2007, 06:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts