> I understand the point you are trying to make, but a RSA key is a RSA key. Not really. http://cs.wellesley.edu/~cs310/lectures/26_rsa_slides_handouts.pdf htt

> I understand the point you are trying to make, but a RSA key is a RSA key. Not really. http://cs.wellesley.edu/~cs310/lectures/26_rsa_slides_handouts.pdf http://cs.wellesley.edu/~cs310/lectures/26_rsa_slides_handou... https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/papers/RSA-survey.pdf https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/papers/RSA-survey.pdf Some of the vulnerable systems that have been attacked this way basically were built on the premise than an RSA key is an RSA key. But an RSA implementation that's secure for one purpose might not be secure for another purpose, for example with malleability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleability_%28cryptography%29#Example_malleable_cryptosystems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleability_%28cryptography%2...