On 09/13/2013 11:32 PM, Jerry Leichter wrote:
On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:06 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
There are a class of hyper-cheap USB audio dongles with very uncomplicated
mixer models. A small flotilla of those might get you some fault-tolerance.
My main thought on such things relates to
On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:06 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
There are a class of hyper-cheap USB audio dongles with very uncomplicated
mixer models. A small flotilla of those might get you some fault-tolerance.
My main thought on such things relates to servers, where power consumption
isn't
Recommendations are given herein as: symmetric_key_length -
recommended_equivalent_RSA_key_length, in bits.
Looking at Wikipedia, I see:
As of 2003 RSA Security claims that 1024-bit RSA keys are equivalent in
strength to 80-bit symmetric keys, 2048-bit RSA keys to 112-bit
symmetric keys and
Also see RFC 3766 from almost a decade ago; it has stood up fairly well.
--Paul Hoffman
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.comwrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 16:55:05 -0400 John Kelsey crypto@gmail.com
wrote:
Everyone,
The more I think about it, the more important it seems that any
anonymous email like communications system *not* include
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 17:23:40 +0100 Max Kington
mking...@webhanger.com wrote:
The keys. This to me is the critical point for widespread adoption,
key management. How do you do this in a way that doesn't put people
off immediately.
You don't seem to be entirely talking about key management,
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:31:22 -0700 Paul Hoffman
paul.hoff...@vpnc.org wrote:
Also see RFC 3766 from almost a decade ago; it has stood up fairly
well.
For those not aware, the document, by Paul and Hilarie Orman,
discusses equivalent key strengths and practical brute force methods,
giving
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
However, on the topic of key management itself, my own proposal was
described here:
http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2013-August/016870.html
In summary, I proposed a way you can map IDs to keys through
On 14/09/13 17:14, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:53:38 +0100 Peter Fairbrother
zenadsl6...@zen.co.uk wrote:
NIST also give the traditional recommendations, 80 - 1024 and 112
- 2048, plus 128 - 3072, 192 - 7680, 256 - 15360.
[...]
But, I wonder, where do these longer
On 14/09/13 18:53 PM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
But, I wonder, where do these longer equivalent figures come from?
http://keylength.com/ (is a better repository to answer your question.)
iang
___
The cryptography mailing list
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:56:02PM -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3766
| requirement | Symmetric | RSA or DH| DSA subgroup |
| for attack | key size | modulus size | size |
+-+---+--+--+
|100
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
I do not think that the spooks are too far away from open research in
QC hardware. It does not seem likely that we'll be getting real QC
any time soon, if ever.
I don't think the spooks are ahead of the public either, and
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:49:50 -0700 Tony Arcieri basc...@gmail.com
wrote:
We still haven't seen quantum computers built yet which can truly
rival their conventional electronic brethren, especially if you
look at it from a cost perspective. DWave computers are interesting
from a novelty
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.comwrote:
DWave has never unambiguously shown their machine actually is a
quantum computer
There was some controversy about that a few months ago. In the end, my
understanding is it netted out that it *is* a real (albeit
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 12:42:22 -0700 Tony Arcieri basc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sure, I never said it could ;) I also said that conventional
computers can still outpace it. I'm certainly NOT saying, that in
their present capacity, that DWave computers are any sort of threat
to modern cryptography.
At 08:32 PM 9/13/2013, Jerry Leichter wrote:
If by server you mean one of those things in a rack at Amazon or
Google or Rackspace - power consumption, and its consequence,
cooling - is *the* major issue these days. Also, the servers used
in such data centers don't have multiple free USB
On 09/14/2013 03:29 PM, John Denker wrote:
Things like clock skew are usually nothing but squish ... not reliably
predictable, but also not reliably unpredictable. I'm not interested
in squish, and I'm not interested in speculation about things that
might be random.
I see theoretical the
Your first two categories are talking about the distribution of entropy--we
assume some unpredictability exists, and we want to quantify it in terms of
bits of entropy per bit of output. That's a useful distinction to make, and as
you said, if you can get even a little entropy per bit and know
18 matches
Mail list logo
