On 12/04/16 17:37, Rick Moen via luv-main wrote: > Quoting Trent W. Buck ([email protected]): >> Because, like, RSA needs to be a lot longer than EC to provide the same >> security level.
> but wonder if you > can refer me to background materials about cryptographic strength. Ecrypt have published a couple of reports on keysizes. A 512bit EC keysize is roughly equivalent to a 15424 bit RSA keysize. http://www.ecrypt.eu.org/ecrypt2/documents/D.SPA.20.pdf These are really just a statement of the mathematical difficulty of brute forcing the keys using the best current algorithms, eg a general number field sieve for prime factoring vs a naive meet-in-the-middle attack to find a discrete logarithm. There are no mathematical proofs of the hardness of any of these problems. As you point out, security also involves other factors - how well an algorithm has been examined by third parties, the soundness of the protocols, endpoint security, and so on. Glenn -- sks-keyservers.net 0x6d656d65
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main
