"Robert J. Hansen" <r...@sixdemonbag.org> writes: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:13:03 +0000, Jerome Baum <jer...@jeromebaum.com> > wrote: >> Correct me if I'm wrong on this one, but it does make your key weaker, >> right? > > No. Using SHA512 with a DSA-1K system is just as secure as, say, using > RIPEMD160 with a DSA-1K system. There are no known attacks against either > hash algorithm, and when used with DSA-1K each provides 160 bits of hash.
Okay so let's try again. Correct me if I'm wrong on this one, but it does make your key weaker _compared with using an algorithm that supports 512 bits of hash, all else being equal_, right? -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
pgpJoT2OxbolT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
