.@csoghoian I liked the rest of your SOUPS talk but 2048-bit RSA should be fine for 10+ more years: http://www.keylength.com
-
-
Replying to @bascule
@csoghoian: +1 w/@bascule. http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/pgp-faq/pgp-faq-keys.html#key-size … http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/41937/pgp-rsa-key-size-encryption-decryption-time …2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @timothy_yim
@timothy_yim@csoghoian another good resource on attacks on 2048-bit RSA keys: http://www.digicert.com/TimeTravel/math.htm …3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@timothy_yim@csoghoian If 2048 bit keys are ever broken by factoring, most likely 4096 will be broken as well.2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bleidl
@bleidl@bascule@timothy_yim@csoghoian hmm if you can use a longer one, use a longer one4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @julianor
@julianor@bleidl@timothy_yim@csoghoian why not use a 16777216-bit key? Or a 281474976710656-bit key? Well, that *would* be silly...1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@bleidl@timothy_yim@csoghoian 'birthday paradox' square root is often underestimated when choosing bit lengths in protocols2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@julianor @bleidl @timothy_yim @csoghoian see http://keylength.com and https://www.digicert.com/TimeTravel/math.htm …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.