On 2015-07-21 00:19, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > So, 4096 bit RSA just gives you an additional 16 bits for your AES, > while doubling the number of RSA bits more than doubles the > computational overhead…
I consider this argument invalid. It's not because "just additional 16 bits" is wrong. Its because the "double the overhead" is completely irrelevant. Even we have only two CPUs and still very little CPU usage. So sure it's double. But double of next to nothing is still nothing. greetings, Mati (jabber.at) -- twitter: @mathiasertl | xing: Mathias Ertl | email: [email protected] I only read plain-text mail! I prefer signed/encrypted mail!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
