cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1994-06-22 - Re: RSA Key Size & QP

Header Data

From: Roger Bryner <bryner@atlas.chem.utah.edu>
To: catalyst-remailer@netcom.com
Message Hash: f94cb47657ea4d329d0f4c3c78075585d06dd8b62a44bf288e8ed3fcd09cb656
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9406221355.A20389-0100000@atlas.chem.utah.edu>
Reply To: <199406221823.LAA11794@mail2.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-06-22 19:17:07 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 22 Jun 94 12:17:07 PDT

Raw message

From: Roger Bryner <bryner@atlas.chem.utah.edu>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 94 12:17:07 PDT
To: catalyst-remailer@netcom.com
Subject: Re: RSA Key Size & QP
In-Reply-To: <199406221823.LAA11794@mail2.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9406221355.A20389-0100000@atlas.chem.utah.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 22 Jun 1994 catalyst-remailer@netcom.com wrote:
> something like that).  If cycles on such a computer would be,
> say, 1,000 times more expensive than on your PC, then
> cracking the key would be 1,000*O(keysize^c) more expensive than 
> generating it, not 1,000*O(c^keysize).  Having a keysize of, say,
> 8 kbits instead of 1 kbit in this circumstance is not at all overkill; 
I would say this can be extended and made a general rule.  You should 
always take some reasonable ammount of time(say 5 min) to encrypt your 
most sensitive messages, even if you have a 12 crays and a connection 
machene.  The algorithim can be viewed as giving you an economic 
advantage, and worying over spending $.01 vs $.0001 is not just stingy, 
it is dangerous.

Roger.

Thread