Benjamin Donnachie wrote the following on 6/16/07 9:01 PM:
> Charly Avital wrote:
>>> We are pleased to announce the availability of Libgcrypt 1.3.0. This
>>> is the first release of a series of development versions ebentually
>>> leading to a new stable 1.4 series.
>> Configured for: Darwin (i386
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Snoken wrote:
> I suppose this means that 1024 bit RSA-keys are ridiculous and the
> Open PGP Card is a joke. And what about all web sites protected by
> SSL with a 1024-bit RSA-certificate?
The only thing that is ridiculous is this flame-bait language. Feel the freedom
to p
Charly Avital wrote:
>> We are pleased to announce the availability of Libgcrypt 1.3.0. This
>> is the first release of a series of development versions ebentually
>> leading to a new stable 1.4 series.
> Configured for: Darwin (i386-apple-darwin8.9.1),MacOS X 10.4.9
No problems here with Darwin
Andrew Berg wrote:
> Anyone who's worried about an entity with the power needed to break
> their messages in time to make any use of it has probably already been
> using a longer key size for a while now.
Or, more likely for someone that paranoid, a one time pad.
Ben
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Snoken wrote:
> Hi, I just read the latest CRYPTO-GRAM, June 15, 2007, by Bruce
> Schneier. He writes:
>
> "We have a new factoring record: 307 digits (1023 bits). It's a
> special number -- 2^1039 - 1 -- but the techniques can be
> generalized
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
I'll get back to this bit in a moment. ;)
> I suppose this means that 1024 bit RSA-keys are ridiculous and the
> Open PGP Card is a joke.
Not necessarily. There's certainly a strong argument to b
Werner Koch wrote the following on 5/4/07 2:48 PM:
> Hello!
>
> We are pleased to announce the availability of Libgcrypt 1.3.0. This
> is the first release of a series of development versions ebentually
> leading to a new stable 1.4 series.
[...]
Configured for: Darwin (i386-apple-darwin8.9.1),
Snoken wrote:
> I suppose this means that 1024 bit RSA-keys are ridiculous
> and the Open PGP Card is a joke. And what about all web sites
> protected by SSL with a 1024-bit RSA-certificate?
This seems to be more-or-less on schedule:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_size#Asymmetric_algorithm_key
Snoken wrote:
> Hi,
> I just read the latest CRYPTO-GRAM, June 15, 2007, by Bruce Schneier.
> He writes:
>
> "We have a new factoring record: 307 digits (1023 bits). It's a
> special number -- 2^1039 - 1 -- but the techniques can be
> generalized. Expect regular 1024-bit numbers to be factored
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I just read the latest CRYPTO-GRAM, June 15, 2007, by Bruce Schneier.
He writes:
"We have a new factoring record: 307 digits (1023 bits). It's a
special number -- 2^1039 - 1 -- but the techniques can be
generalized. Expect regular 1024-bit numb
10 matches
Mail list logo