Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-20 Thread Paul Hoffman
At 7:54 AM -0600 7/18/09, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
This involves deciding whether a 192-bit elliptic curve public key is strong 
enough...

Why not just go with 256-bit EC (128-bit symmetric strength)? Is the 8 bytes 
per signature the issue, or the extra compute time?

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-20 Thread Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn

On Sunday,2009-07-19, at 13:24 , Paul Hoffman wrote:


At 7:54 AM -0600 7/18/09, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
This involves deciding whether a 192-bit elliptic curve public key  
is strong enough...


Why not just go with 256-bit EC (128-bit symmetric strength)? Is  
the 8 bytes per signature the issue, or the extra compute time?


Those are two good guesses, but no.  The main concern is the size of  
the public key.  This is why (if I understand correctly),  
hyperelliptic curves might eventually offer public key signatures  
which are twice as good for the purposes of TahoeLAFS as elliptic  
curves.  (By which I mean, the keys are half as big.)  I discussed  
this topic a bit in a subsequent message to the cryptography mailing  
list entitled Why hyperelliptic curves?.


Actually, the computation time matters, too.  Our measurements on an  
ARM 266 MHz embedded system showed a significant penalty for 256-bit  
ECDSA vs. 192-bit:


http://allmydata.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2009-June/002083.html

Regards,

Zooko

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-19 Thread Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn
By the way, we've recently been planning our next crypto-capabilities  
design for the TahoeLAFS secure distributed filesystem.  This  
involves deciding whether a 192-bit elliptic curve public key is  
strong enough, as well as subtler and more unusual issues involving  
embedding keys directly into filehandles or URLS, multiple-targets  
attacks, and a novel public key scheme that I invented (and that  
therefore I think we shouldn't use):


http://allmydata.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2009-July/002314.html

Your comments would be appreciated!  I've added  
ta...@hyperelliptic.org and jam...@echeque.com to the list of  
addresses that can post to tahoe-dev without being subscribed.


Regards,

Zooko

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-17 Thread james hughes


On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:43 PM, James A. Donald wrote:


2033130

Subsequent expansions in computing power will involve breaking up  
Jupiter to build really big computers, and so forth, which will slow  
things down a bit.


So 144 bit EC keys should be good all the way to the singularity and  
a fair way past it.


Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.

I have researched the possibility of 50 or 100 year key sizes. All we  
have to do is look back 50 years to the (unbreakable) Enigma, and 30  
years to the famous Sci.Am article by Rivest that said it would take  
40 quadrillion years to break the challenge, which actually took 25,  
or more recently, or FEAL, or RC-4 (WEP), or MD-5, or SHA-1, or, or  
need I say more?


If we assume that all knowledge to be discovered has been discovered,  
and all mathematical insight humanity is capable of has been achieved,  
you are correct that 144 bit EC keys are good all the way to the  
singularity (which actually depends on the Hubble constant, but I  
digress) and that everything that could be invented has been invented.


I believe it is folly to suggest that 144 bit keys will never be  
broken. Frankly, I hope to see the day.


Jim

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-17 Thread Tanja Lange
 So with about 1 000 000 USD and a full year you would get 122 bits 
 already now and agencies have a bit more budget than this! Furthermore,
 the algorithm parallelizes extremely well and can handle a batch of 100
 targets at only 10 times the cost. 
 
 No it cannot handle a bunch of a hundred targets at only ten times the 
 cost.  It is already parallelized.  A hundred targets is a hundred times 
 the cost.
 
NO. Read
Fabian Kuhn, René Struik: Random Walks Revisited: Extensions of
Pollard's Rho Algorithm for Computing Multiple Discrete Logarithms.
Selected Areas in Cryptography 2001: 212-229
Section 4.

Besides, the estimates assume only playstations and the EPFL code instead 
of special purpose hardware which would give an extra speed up.

And, no, I'm not suggesting to use the entire US gross national product
for a year to break your key but given that that breaks 172 bits (SHARCS
2006 estimates for ECC-163 and 9 bits to scale from USD 5.8*10^11 to the
GDP 1.4*10^13) I'm not comfortable with 160 bits, let alone 144.

All the best
Tanja

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-16 Thread James A. Donald

Tanja Lange wrote:
So with about 1 000 000 USD and a full year you would get 122 bits 
already now and agencies have a bit more budget than this! Furthermore,

the algorithm parallelizes extremely well and can handle a batch of 100
targets at only 10 times the cost. 


No it cannot handle a bunch of a hundred targets at only ten times the 
cost.  It is already parallelized.  A hundred targets is a hundred times 
the cost.


But let us not think small.  Suppose the president says Break James 
Donald's key.  I don't care how much it costs.  The sky is the limit 
and they devote the entire US gross national product for a year to 
breaking James Donald's key in a year.


Then they can break a 170 bit key.

But I rather doubt that they will.


-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-14 Thread James A. Donald

Hi all,

We are pleased to announce that we have set a new record for the elliptic
curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP) by solving it over a 112-bit
finite field. The previous record was for a 109-bit prime field and
dates back from October 2002.


 See for more details our announcement at 
http://lacal.epfl.ch/page81774.html.


Computing power doubles every 18 months to two years, so the required EC 
length should gain a bit every year or every nine months.


Which suggests that existing deployments should default to 128 bits. 
with 160 bits being overkill.  Of course overkill does not cost much. 
If one shoots someone the head, it is wise to follow up with a second 
shot through the head at very short range just to be on the safe side.


YearBreakable keys.
2009112
2010113
2015117
2020121
2025124

I am assuming a rapid rate of progress, in which case line widths halve 
every four years.


In which case Moore's law breaks in 2033 when we get nanometer line 
widths, for lines will then be molecules - probably carbon nanotubes.


2033130

Subsequent expansions in computing power will involve breaking up 
Jupiter to build really big computers, and so forth, which will slow 
things down a bit.


So 144 bit EC keys should be good all the way to the singularity and a 
fair way past it.


-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


Re: 112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-14 Thread Tanja Lange
 We are pleased to announce that we have set a new record for the elliptic
 curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP) by solving it over a 112-bit
 finite field. The previous record was for a 109-bit prime field and
 dates back from October 2002.
 
First of all congratulations to the team at EPFL!

 Which suggests that existing deployments should default to 128 bits. 
 with 160 bits being overkill.  Of course overkill does not cost much. 
 If one shoots someone the head, it is wise to follow up with a second 
 shot through the head at very short range just to be on the safe side.
 
James, do I really have to point out the obvious that just because 112 
bits is a new record this does not mean that 113 is undoable today. The 
coolness of this result is that a smallish cluster of low cost machines 
could do this computation in only half a year. 200 PS3s cost you no more 
than 200 x 400 USD at published prices - and less if you buy that many 
at once. So with about 1 000 000 USD and a full year you would get 122 bits 
already now and agencies have a bit more budget than this! Furthermore,
the algorithm parallelizes extremely well and can handle a batch of 100
targets at only 10 times the cost. 

So, yes, we sure will be able to break 130 bits in 2033 - but certainly
much sooner if anyone tries.

Tanja

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com


112-bit prime ECDLP solved

2009-07-12 Thread Joppe Bos

Hi all,

We are pleased to announce that we have set a new record for the elliptic
curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP) by solving it over a 112-bit
finite field. The previous record was for a 109-bit prime field and
dates back from October 2002. Our calculation was done on a cluster of
more than 200 PlayStation 3 game consoles at the EPFL.

See for more details our announcement at http://lacal.epfl.ch/page81774.html.

Best regards,

Joppe Bos

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com