From: "Chris Adams" <adamsc@io-online.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 18:45:41 +0800
To: "cypherpunks" <markm@voicenet.com>
Subject: Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
Message-ID: <199607120142.SAA19572@cygnus.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On 9 Jul 96 17:46:00 -0800, markm@voicenet.com wrote:

>> As an experiment generate a 2047 bit PGP key and a 512 bit PGP key.
>> Encrypt a file (preferably of a reasonable size) using both keys.
>> Depending on the computer you are using, the time difference between the
>> two keys will be a matter of few seconds or even a fraction of a second.
>
>Now try decrypting the file, or signing another file.  I have a 486-66 which
>is now considered hopelessly sluggish by today's standards.  It takes about
>5 seconds, while doing the same operation with a 512-bit key takes less than a
>second.  I sign every one of my messages, so such a time delay gets quite

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.

// Chris Adams <adamsc@io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript!
// Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject
// of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!