On 01.07.2014 23:28, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Assuming you mean "RSA as used in GnuPG", it is not feasible with the
> kinds of computers we know how to build. It will take science-fiction
> level breakthroughs in either engineering, mathematics, or both, to do this.
>
> The integer factorization
> Am Di 01.07.2014, 09:29:57 schrieb eMyListsDDg:
>> somehow i managed to send a key id to a key server that has no
>> secret-key. so i would like to remove it.
>> gpg --output keyrevoke.asc --gen-revoke 0x
>> doesn't work since there is no secret key.
>> at a loss as to how to remove/revoke t
Please don't reply to a message on the list and change the subject line.
Doing so causes your new topic to show "under" the previous one for
those using mail readers that thread properly, and may cause your
message to be missed altogether if someone has blocked that thread.
Instead, save the l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 2 July 2014 at 2:26:07 AM, in
, Jérôme Pinguet wrote:
> OpenPGP as a kind of HashCash / proof of work solution
> to spam?
> If this proposition makes sense, that would open the
> way for a huge increase in user base! :-)
Mail en
> Could this last property of bigger keys, significantly increasing CPU
> time needed to send encrypted/signed messages, be used as an anti-spam
> feature?
Not really. If you've got a hijacked botnet of 50,000 machines, what do
you care if the CPU gets pegged? You're not the machine's owner.
Bonjour!
Thanks to the recent bikeshedding, I learnt that doubling keysize on an
asymetric key algorithm based on discrete logarithm or integer
factorization doesn't, by far, double the resistance to bruteforcing,
which in itself is seldom if ever the weak link in a secure
communication scheme.
I
> Yeah, but someone told us (pointed us at) here some time ago that
> breaking RSA was NOT the same like breaking RSA... ;-)
Dan Boneh has a really interesting paper showing that RSAP may not be
the same as IFP, yes. But that paper exists on a very abstract plane:
my math is enough that I can re
Am Di 01.07.2014, 17:28:36 schrieb Robert J. Hansen:
> The integer factorization problem (the math RSA is built upon) is
> conjectured to be infeasible to break.
Yeah, but someone told us (pointed us at) here some time ago that
breaking RSA was NOT the same like breaking RSA... ;-)
--
Crypto f
> Looking at the RSA algorithm. Is it possible to calculate the private
> key when a message is available both encrypted and decrypted? Maybe not
> with just one message, but with a thousand?
Assuming you mean "RSA as used in GnuPG", it is not feasible with the
kinds of computers we know how to bu
Dear gnupg users,
I have a question regarding a feature from mailbox.org [0]. This
provider offers to encrypt every unencrypted email you receive with your
public key. Thus only encrypted emails will be stored on the server.
Is there any security related problem, when an attacker has both, the
en
Am Di 01.07.2014, 09:29:57 schrieb eMyListsDDg:
> somehow i managed to send a key id to a key server that has no
> secret-key. so i would like to remove it.
>
> gpg --output keyrevoke.asc --gen-revoke 0x
>
> doesn't work since there is no secret key.
>
> at a loss as to how to remove/revoke thi
somehow i managed to send a key id to a key server that has no secret-key. so i
would like to remove it.
gpg --output keyrevoke.asc --gen-revoke 0x
doesn't work since there is no secret key.
at a loss as to how to remove/revoke this key
___
Gnupg-
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Gnupg-users [mailto:gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org] Im Auftrag von
> Werner Koch
> Gesendet: Montag, 30. Juni 2014 20:37
> An: gnupg-annou...@gnupg.org; info-...@gnu.org
> Betreff: [Announce] GnuPG 1.4.18 released
>
> Hello!
Hello Werner,
> We are please
13 matches
Mail list logo
