I may be wrong, but i take for true that NSA as 10 to 30 years advance on maths and cryptographic méthod.
Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, George Torwell a écrit : > i may be wrong but: > - we are talking about keys of every node along the path. how can you > increase that just locally? > - keep in mind that we dont know if factoring such a key is likely, if i > remember correctly that talk mentioned huge amounts of computation power > and electricity. > something like a year for a 40 mega watt consuming data center per 1024 > bit key. <maybe way off, but the point being - its really expensive.> > on the other hand its rumored that the utah data center will have 65 > mega watts from its own power station. > im pretty sure that the developers will move us safely from these keys as > soon as its needed :) > > > On 4 April 2013 13:54, Bernard Tyers <ei8...@ei8fdb.org <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > That's what I was thinking, I just didn't know if there was another > > reasons. > > > > I guess the key size is configured on the Tor node? I haven't found it > > anywhere in the configuration (I'm using TBB on OS X). > > > > Is it possible to increase the size of the key, if say I've got a big > > server running as a node? > > > > If there are nodes using different length keys, is the security relying > on > > the node with the smallest key length? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Bernard > > > > ---- > > Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and (possible) > > misspelling. > > > > Alexandre Guillioud <guillioud.alexan...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > >The bigger the key is, the longer (cpu cycle) it take to > encrypt/decrypt ? > > > > > >Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, Bernard Tyers a écrit : > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not > > used? > > >> Do higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency? > > >> > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Bernard > > >> > > >> > > >> ---- > > >> Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and > > (probable) > > >> misspelling. > > >> > > >> George Torwell <bpmcont...@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > >> > > >> a second guess would be going after 1024 bit keys. > > >> there is also a video on youtube from a recent con about the > > feasibility of > > >> factoring them, <"fast hacks" or something like that> at the end, > jacob > > >> applebaum asks about it and they advise him to use longer keys or > > elliptic > > >> curves crypto. > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> tor-talk mailing list > > >> tor-talk@lists.torproject.org <javascript:;> <javascript:;> > > >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > > >> > > >_______________________________________________ > > >tor-talk mailing list > > >tor-talk@lists.torproject.org <javascript:;> > > >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > > _______________________________________________ > > tor-talk mailing list > > tor-talk@lists.torproject.org <javascript:;> > > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-talk mailing list > tor-talk@lists.torproject.org <javascript:;> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
