mailing list archives
Re: Introducing TGP...
From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <Thor () hammerofgod com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 22:47:37 +0000
You're using a 1024 bit key here which seems a bit gutsy ;-)
Without better attacks, you basically have:
Brute force AES 256 -> O(2^256)
Bruce force your 20 char password -> roughly O(2^(20*7)) == O(2^140)
Factor your 1024 bit public modulus -> roughly O(2^80)
Since a 768 bit RSA key has already been factored I'd say you only
have a few years before a moderately sized cluster could factor your public
Of course, as I write this I realize I'm about to sign this message
with a 1024 bit DSA key...
Actually it's 2048, which I was comfortable with. And don't forget the 16bit
salt on that password ;)
I stand corrected-that key was indeed 1024, not 2048. LSI still has some hope in cracking my key and getting that scan
of my passport since I used "ancient encryption" after all! FWIW, v1.1.07 actually uses 4096 bit keys, which I will
update shortly. Not sure if I'm going to make that configurable or not. I'm thinking no, because there's no real
value in using a smaller key in this application.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: Introducing TGP... Jeffrey Walton (Jun 14)