From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:10:38 +0800
To: "Mark M." <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
Message-ID: <199607100607.XAA09583@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 08:38 PM 7/9/96 -0400, Mark M. wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>On Tue, 9 Jul 1996, jim bell wrote:
>
>> I don't think it's going to make a great deal of difference.  We've "all" 
>> shifted to 1024-bit keys, even though it's unlikely anybody will have the 
>> resources to crack them for decades if not centuries.  And the moment any 
>> government prosecutes anyone with information obtained by a decrypt of a 
>> 1024-bit key, the (then) stragglers will join the rest of us at 1500 or 
>> 2000+.  The government knows this and there's nothing it can do about it, 
>> except possibly for GAK and it isn't making much headway in that.
>
>Wiretaps aren't always used as evidence.  It's a very effective way to snoop
>on people under suspect and get some information on where some incriminating
>information may be, but they rarely produce hard evidence.

I'm well aware of that.  However, I think we will shortly be entering an era 
where wiretaps are useless, and it will not be considered worth the risk to 
do them illegally, because the probability of being able to decrypt them 
will be so low.

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com