From: “David F. Ogren” <ogren@cris.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 15023e9541b191969392110c190ebdad77fa086e3a1b1857e0a4cbd7adaaa236
Message ID: <199607131655.MAA19369@darius.cris.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-13 22:42:48 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 06:42:48 +0800
From: "David F. Ogren" <ogren@cris.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 06:42:48 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
Message-ID: <199607131655.MAA19369@darius.cris.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Sat Jul 13 12:51:36 1996
> On Thu, 11 Jul 1996, Chris Adams wrote:
>
> > check your setup. I used to run a 386-20 (5MB RAM) and it took about
> 3
> > seconds for a 1024 bit key. Given it didn't even have a copro (not
> sure
> > when/if PGP uses one) and that it was off of a Stackered drive, I'd
> > expect you to have much better times.
>
> That's consistent with the timings I've been getting. It should take
> about
> 9 seconds to decrypt an arbitrary message with a 2048-bit key with the
> setup
> you describe. Of course, I usually use X, so that probably does throw
> off
> the timings a bit.
>
This is an issue that is connected with the "Need PGP awareness" thread.
If everyone is decrypting their messages by hand then nine seconds is a
hinderance. On the other hand, if everyone is using an off-line reader
that checks signatures/decrypts as it receives messages then nine seconds
(or less for a newer machine) is less significant.
I'll refrain from making any product plugs here, but I could barely notice
the difference moving from a 1024 bit key to a 2047 bit key.
- --
David F. Ogren |
ogren@concentric.net | "A man without religion is like a fish
PGP Key ID: 0x6458EB29 | without a bicycle"
- ------------------------------|----------------------------------------
Don't know what PGP is? | Need my public key? It's available
Send a message to me with the | by server or by sending me a message
subject GETPGPINFO | with the subject GETPGPKEY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQEVAwUBMefUGeSLhCBkWOspAQGuPgf+I2A0a3F6OeBMA9MGUp0ww13Xiq3+LdS4
pOEvhz7Ub1tBUcl5Ko8/y/7pIZE1pZom0fOoyDOD9HX9OrHrY7sDkKbDY2sirfEl
dovFKKImIJaMzxDgKhxAdlrmrLq/xrz2rAXv9FvA/KSkCJys/A7ydu9AprKA7Esf
E6qRDmQFuuTcNvEVC5WOoDLVQoNZQUe1gVs97YFYFabTMA0bXr8bI/RdHcFy8vIj
51jBSI3Ib2WgcGOa2dKrmU7TRMQk5UHGGxKuKGGgIaOZ4uvPVUmNwHVg9wADbnzX
fjkZBvk8/sIqvD4Z4rHWulpHVJxCgKHzVgsh7exCVoZlffITu0SHqw==
=kHRX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Return to July 1996
Return to ““David F. Ogren” <ogren@cris.com>”
1996-07-13 (Sun, 14 Jul 1996 06:42:48 +0800) - Re: A case for 2560 bit keys - “David F. Ogren” <ogren@cris.com>