Charlie Lenahan wrote:
George Adams wrote:
[...]
2) Related to that, should I be worried that I'm generating a
public/private keypair for my Apache2/mod_ssl server that's only
1024-bits? Do I even have the OPTION of having a larger/stronger
key, or am I going to hit some weird compatibility p
Charlie Lenahan wrote:
George Adams wrote:
1) Why isn't everyone using stronger public/private key pairs?
Nobody who seems to offer SSL certs (Verisign, Thawte, GoDaddy,
Comodo) tells their customers to generate 2048-bit keys with
OpenSSL. Obviously they're not worried - why not?
The questi
George Adams wrote:
1) Why isn't everyone using stronger public/private key pairs? Nobody
who seems to offer SSL certs (Verisign, Thawte, GoDaddy, Comodo) tells
their customers to generate 2048-bit keys with OpenSSL. Obviously
they're not worried - why not?
It's really up to you to determi
I only know some basics about SSL, symmetric keys and asymmetric keys, and
I'd greatly appreciate anyone who can shed some light on this question!
My understanding (and feel free to correct anything below here!) is that SSL
transactions between a web browser and a web server involve first a
ha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who will mandate ECC by 2010???
NIST. Most likely Europe will follow.
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Uri
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. August 2005 14:54
An: openssl-users@openssl.org
Betreff: Re: RSA key
Who will mandate ECC by 2010???
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Uri
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. August 2005 14:54
> An: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Betreff: Re: RSA key sizes
>
>
> Please note that the
Please note that the importance of RSA is going to decline in favor of
Elliptic Curve Crypto over GF(p). In particular, by 2010 ECC will be
mandated. I suspect there are cryptographic reasons for it.
__
OpenSSL Project
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005, Tan Eng Ten wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a general crypto question and I hope someone could help me
> out.
>
> Often we use RSA of 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, etc. bit lengths. Are
> other sizes such as 520/1045 bit "valid"? Mathematically, it should
>
see below
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Tan Eng Ten
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. August 2005 11:28
> An: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: RSA key sizes
>
>
> Cool.. but the key below
> Cool.. but the key below has 128 bytes in total, but reported as being
> 1023-bit
>
> -
> Modulus (1023 bit):
> 5d:10:63:d3:d8:00:2a:50:ab:65:8a:f0:92:83:b0:
> 6a:39:e3:0c:38:aa:f5:32:23:71:25:8e:4a:8d:50:
> fd:80:a3:95:59:33:27:92:88:d0:1d:28:dd:05:7c:
> b6:a0:5e:68:
: Mittwoch, 17. August 2005 08:22
An: openssl-users@openssl.org
Betreff: RSA key sizes
Hi all,
This is a general crypto question and I hope someone
could help me out.
Often we use RSA of 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, etc. bit
lengths. Are other
sizes such as 520/1045 bit "valid"? Math
August 2005 08:22
> An: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Betreff: RSA key sizes
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> This is a general crypto question and I hope someone
> could help me out.
>
> Often we use RSA of 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, etc. bit
> lengths. A
Microsoft Root
Certificate Authority key in the Microsoft Certificate Store is 4096 bits in
length.
Steven
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni
Sent: Wednesday, 17 August 2005 4:45 PM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: RS
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 02:21:30PM +0800, Tan Eng Ten wrote:
> This is a general crypto question and I hope someone could help me
> out.
>
> Often we use RSA of 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, etc. bit lengths. Are
> other sizes such as 520/1045 bit "valid"? Mathematically, it sh
Hi all,
This is a general crypto question and I hope someone could help me out.
Often we use RSA of 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, etc. bit lengths. Are other
sizes such as 520/1045 bit "valid"? Mathematically, it should work, but
are there reasons why odd sizes are not to be used?
_
15 matches
Mail list logo
