"Robert J. Hansen" <r...@sixdemonbag.org> writes: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:33:33 +0000, Jerome Baum <jer...@jeromebaum.com> > wrote: >> So you're admitting there exists a reason not to use RSA-2048? > > I've never said there is *no* reason to ever go past RSA-2048. There > clearly are special cases where more is necessary. However, for the > overwhelming majority of users I see no reason to go past RSA-2048.
Would you say those users would be "just fine" with RSA-4096? So now if those users are fine with 2048 and 4096 for their key length, and there exist some users who are fine only with 4096, and some who are fine only with 2048, the recommended default should be that which has a bigger total group size, no? So, if we can give no reasons not to use RSA-4096 (which includes reasons to prefer RSA-2048 over -4096), then we have a larger total group size for -4096 users than -2048 users. Concluding, the default should be 4096. -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
pgpZQ2zWxZTws.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
