cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1995-11-09 - Re: Photuris Primality verification needed

Header Data

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
To: adam@lighthouse.homeport.org
Message Hash: 056c3969339d8b9ede404dfd9f1ec2b6d3cd29f59bae1d50013e51d3dc82d80e
Message ID: <199511090454.UAA04547@servo.qualcomm.com>
Reply To: <199511090418.XAA07907@homeport.org>
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-09 05:10:46 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 13:10:46 +0800

Raw message

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 13:10:46 +0800
To: adam@lighthouse.homeport.org
Subject: Re: Photuris Primality verification needed
In-Reply-To: <199511090418.XAA07907@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <199511090454.UAA04547@servo.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>You might want to offer a number of strong moduli in the 1024-1500 bit
>range.  Having multiple strong moduli in the same size (speed) range

We already have a secondary 1024-bit modulus in the spec. The question is
whether the problem is better solved by allowing parties to use private
moduli rather than by filling up the spec with additional moduli. Remember
that the original reason for specifying a particular modulus as "required"
is to guarantee some minimum degree of interoperability, not to meet every
possible threat.

Phil

Thread