3 ms·
Interesting article, lead me on a bit of a side tangent to my usual monday morning. Based on people saying that 1024 bit RSA is no longer considered secure. I
by thefreshteapot 16y ago
Interesting article, lead me on a bit of a side tangent to my usual monday morning.
Based on people saying that 1024 bit RSA is no longer considered secure. I hunted down what I believe is at least one source from nist.gov.
http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=903633 http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id...
With the default having to be increased in less than a few months, I was a little surprised to see that google, having recently trumpeted about their "encrypted" search is using 1024bits.
https://encrypted.google.com/ https://encrypted.google.com/
If you check their certificates you will see it is 1024bit.
I was hoping to compare it to https://duckduckgo.com https://duckduckgo.com, yet it turns out they too are running 1024bits.
I hasten to add, I dont really understand the significance of different ciphers used etc, this is purely based on bits.
- eru 16y agoElliptic curve cryptography can get away with less bits in the keys than RSA at the moment. We do a better job of breaking RSA than elliptic curves. I don't know about Diffie-Hellman, which is based on discrete logarithms.