Hi Robert.
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Robert J. Hansen <r...@sixdemonbag.org> wrote: > Not really. If there were good reasons to believe OpenBSD's entropy > collector was better than Linux's, the Linux crew would fix the code, > maybe even borrowing OpenBSD's entropy collector. Ah,.. right... it was the other way round it didn't work (GPL2 to BSD ;) ) >> -Currently the default (and I assume suggested) algorithm is RSA, >> right? How does DSA2 compare with it? > Arguing whether RSA or DSA2 is better is kind of like arguing whether > King Kong or Godzilla is better at stomping cities flat. One should perhaps count in all the King Kong vs. Godzilla moviews,.. who has won more often? ;-) >> I once read, that RSA would >> provide a hash algorithm armor which the DSA's wouldn't have. Is this >> still true? > > Yes. No. Not really. Kind of. ooook... ^^ >> should lead to about the same "strenght"... > > Beware of those numbers. I don't know anyone who takes them seriously. > They are conjecture and speculation. Educated conjecture and > speculation, sure: some of the brightest minds out there worked on the > conjecture and speculation -- but they're still conjecture and > speculation. > > That said, there's nothing wrong with using those numbers as long as you > remember that they're conjecture. Ok,.. I see. > If memory serves, the key generation code is identical between the 1.4 > and 2.0 branches. Thanks :) Philippe. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
