cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1995-11-09 - Re: PGP Comment feature weakens remailer security

Header Data

From: Jon Lasser <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>
To: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
Message Hash: 371a3472ee1abc3f0e70880558149e09b9bfeab3fa3bb6bfb9ab5e408c253d29
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951109151948.23203B-100000@rwd.goucher.edu>
Reply To: <199511091413.JAA15288@jekyll.piermont.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-09 21:56:29 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 05:56:29 +0800

Raw message

From: Jon Lasser <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 05:56:29 +0800
To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Subject: Re: PGP Comment feature weakens remailer security
In-Reply-To: <199511091413.JAA15288@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951109151948.23203B-100000@rwd.goucher.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 9 Nov 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> > I agree entirely. That's why my PGP key at school is 382 bits. It's a
> > lot easier to compromise my machine than factor a 382 bit number.
> 
> On the other hand, it costs nothing by most people's standards to use
> a 1024 bit key, so why not use one? I find that there is only a point
> in using low security for anything in particular when there is a
> perceivable cost to it -- if the cost is typing a different number
> while doing key generation, I don't see why one should suffer the
> tradeoff.

Actually, it makes a sort of sense; if I see a 384 bit PGP key, it 
strikes me as insecure, and I really consider it; unless it says so on 
the 1024 bit key, I wouldn't think about it much.  It's useful as a human 
identifier, assuming it's not the weakest link in the chain.

Jon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lasser                <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>            (410)494-3072 
          Visit my home page at http://www.goucher.edu/~jlasser/
  You have a friend at the NSA: Big Brother is watching. Finger for PGP key.

Thread