4 ms·
128-bit is still absolutely impractical to brute force now or in the foreseeable future. Even 96-bit is questionable, though likely achievable after some time b
by api 5y ago
128-bit is still absolutely impractical to brute force now or in the foreseeable future. Even 96-bit is questionable, though likely achievable after some time by someone with a lot of money who is able to create a huge farm full of ASICs for the task.
A QC large and stable enough to run Grover's Algorithm would be a problem for symmetric keys and hashes smaller than about 192 bits. Most cryptographers recommend 256-bit or larger for a good margin of safety.
Asymmetric crypto is more complex story.
- cobookman 5y agoFurthermore, why brute-force crack crypto when you can inject code using the log4j exploit which transmits the private keys. Sure log4j might have been recently patched, but it's not unrealistic to think that a nation-state has access to similar exploits.
- api 5y agoYes, a thousand times. The vast majority of compromises happen because of software exploits or social engineering. This is not an argument for using shitty cryptography, but it is IMHO an argument for being more afraid of the implementation and the human beings using it than the crypto.