Tom Ritter <[email protected]> writes: >The public keys were all analyzed and compared efficiently pairwise >(computing the GCD I believe) to see if by some small chance a factorization >would occur. And it did - I recall the website saying it was a very strange >scenario with one of the keys not actually being correctly semiprime and >having several small factors.
My code performs fairly rigorous checks on any keys it processes. At one point it was rejecting keys generated by a CA for a user, and when I looked into it found some similar problem (I can't remember the exact details, I just reported back to the user that the keys their CA was generating for them were being rejected as insecure. I think they fixed the problem by disabling the check). The amusing thing about this is that the usual CA argument for the backwards process of having the CA generate the private key for the user is that the CA wants to make sure it's done correctly. Peter. _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
