From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4eb830e0b72f14a0cd72efa257a35d204ebdda1f49c07d5de3d85a973f30d725
Message ID: <199412171643.IAA29300@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Reply To: <199412161933.LAA09366@largo.remailer.net>
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-17 16:43:46 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 17 Dec 94 08:43:46 PST
From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 94 08:43:46 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Thoughts on 15 day CJ crypto
In-Reply-To: <199412161933.LAA09366@largo.remailer.net>
Message-ID: <199412171643.IAA29300@jobe.shell.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
It is an interesting idea that the RSA actually helps with the RC4
decryption by letting them check a key guess.
This would suggest, though, that RC4 alone would not be allowed, only RC4
plus RSA. If they allowed RC4 alone then unlimited-length RSA would not
seem any worse since with RC4 alone you don't get the key-checking
feature.
Also, are there restrictions on the encryption exponent? A 1024 bit RSA
with a small encryption exponent would be faster to check than a 512 bit
RSA with an arbitrary 512 bit encryption exponent. So if this were the
reason you might think they would put some restrictions on that.
Hal
Return to December 1994
Return to “Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>”