On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 09:16:13AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > Since the table of primes previously mentioned tops out at around
> > 30bit primes
> > (and there are 50 Million of those)... and modern cryptography
> > suggests at
> > least 4096 bit primes, you are completely doing the right thing
> > by not using
> > a table.
>
> ONLY IF he's using LARGE primes. He hasn't said if he is or not.
> Meaning, in the algorithim cited, he would be requesting much
> larger than a 64 bit prime.
>
You are reading too much into this, and 64 bit primes are NOT large,
~500-bit primes are barely large enough for RSA, and ~1000-bit primes
are suitable for DH. When Sun (early 90's) used a 192-bit prime in
"secure-RPC", it got cracked
@article{nfscrack,
author = {Brian A. LaMacchia and Andrew M. Odlyzko},
journal = {Designs, Codes, and Cryptography},
pages = {46--62},
title = {Computation of Discrete Logarithms in Prime Fields},
volume = {1},
year = {1991},
}
I'd like to suggest that this thread has already covered all the relevant
issues. Perhaps we can move on...
--
Viktor.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
