From: doug@OpenMind.com (Doug Cutrell)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 67dcf73ffdffd52a0c325d76ec651c99371ac9d1476d4b0298d72246bf977632
Message ID: <ab6456634e021003a86a@[198.232.141.2]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-13 01:33:06 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 17:33:06 PST
From: doug@OpenMind.com (Doug Cutrell)
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 17:33:06 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions
Message-ID: <ab6456634e021003a86a@[198.232.141.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Bruce Schneier gives us:
> Table 4: Recommended public-key key lengths (in bits)
>
> Year vs. I vs. C vs. G
> 1995 768 1280 1536
> 2000 1024 1280 1536
> 2005 1280 1536 2048
> 2010 1280 1536 2048
> 2015 1536 2048 2048
I applaud Bruce for making this unpopular presentation of the somber facts.
If these figures are taken seriously, the conclusion is that 1024 bit keys
are not even good TODAY if one is concerned about the C or G level attack.
In fact, not even the 1280 bit key is good for G level attack today.
Pay attention, people. Factoring is still a good cryptographic approach,
but the key lengths have to keep growing larger. Factoring may be NP-hard
in the key length, but the rate of growth of our ability to factor is
actually going up exponentially as well. The speed of encryption and
decryption for 2048 bit keys on my Pentium is quite reasonable today... and
my confidence in the long-term security of my encrypted files has increased
considerably with the advent of PGP 2.6.2, for just that reason.
Doug Cutrell
_____________________________________________________________
Doug Cutrell General Partner
doug@OpenMind.com Open Mind, Santa Cruz
=============================================================
Return to February 1995
Return to “doug@OpenMind.com (Doug Cutrell)”
1995-02-13 (Sun, 12 Feb 95 17:33:06 PST) - Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions - doug@OpenMind.com (Doug Cutrell)