On May 29, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Sam Whited wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:47 PM, David Shaw <ds...@jabberwocky.com> wrote: >> On May 29, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> >> What is your concern here, though - accidental or intentional collision? > > Certainly both; while accidental collision isn't probable, 32-bit IDs > aren't exactly collision resistant either. This, coupled with the fact > that a nice GPGPU is now relatively inexpensive makes brute forcing > collisions not only possible, but relatively easy for a determined > attacker.
The reason I bring it up is that using the v3 key attack, 64-bit key IDs have no particular benefit over 32-bit IDs for intentional collisions (i.e. an attacker generating a key with the same key ID as the victim in order to confuse matters and/or steal traffic). It's just as easy to forge 64 bits as it is to forge 32… David _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
