At 01:54 PM 8/16/2010, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:42:41 -0700 Paul Hoffman
wrote:
> At 11:35 AM +1000 8/16/10, Arash Partow wrote:
> >Just out of curiosity, assuming the optimal use of today's best of
> >breed factoring algorithms - will there be enough energy in our
> >solar
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:42:41 -0700 Paul Hoffman
wrote:
> At 11:35 AM +1000 8/16/10, Arash Partow wrote:
> >Just out of curiosity, assuming the optimal use of today's best of
> >breed factoring algorithms - will there be enough energy in our
> >solar system to factorize a 2048-bit RSA integer?
>
>
On Aug 15, 2010, at 8:35 PM, Arash Partow wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, assuming the optimal use of today's best of breed
> factoring algorithms - will there be enough energy in our solar system to
> factorize a 2048-bit RSA integer?
Computation can be performed with arbitrarily small energy
At 11:35 AM +1000 8/16/10, Arash Partow wrote:
>Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>You are under the wrong impression, unless you are reading vastly different
>>crypto literature than the rest of us are. RSA-1024 *might* be possible to
>>break in public at some point in the next decade, and RSA-2048 is a few
On Aug 15, 2010, at 1:17 30PM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> Ray Dillinger writes:
>> On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 14:55 -0500, eric.lengve...@wellsfargo.com wrote:
>>
>>> The big drawback is that those who want to follow NIST's recommendations
>>> to migrate to 2048-bit keys will be returning to the 2005-er
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:55:32PM -0500, eric.lengve...@wellsfargo.com wrote:
> There are some possibilities, my co-workers and I have discussed. For
> purely internal systems TLS-PSK (RFC 4279) provides symmetric
> encryption through pre-shared keys which provides us with whitelisting
> as well a
Samuel Neves wrote:
> If an attacker creating a special-purpose machine to break your keys is
> a realistic scenario, why are you even considering keys of that size?
What's the threat model?
If the set of possible actors includes first world SIGINT agencies, then yes,
it is a reasonable assumpt
Paul Hoffman wrote:
You are under the wrong impression, unless you are reading vastly different
crypto literature than the rest of us are. RSA-1024 *might* be possible to
break in public at some point in the next decade, and RSA-2048 is a few orders
of magnitude harder than that.
Just out o
