5 ms·
And even 1024-bit SSL, unless you believe the NSA can't afford to devote <$1M per year per key to the effort: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57591560-38/fac
by declan 13y ago
And even 1024-bit SSL, unless you believe the NSA can't afford to devote <$1M per year per key to the effort:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57591560-38/facebooks-outmoded-web-crypto-opens-door-to-nsa-spying/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57591560-38/facebooks-outm...
Eran Tromer, an assistant professor of computer science at Tel Aviv University who wrote his 2007 dissertation on custom code-breaking hardware, said it's now "feasible to build dedicated hardware devices that can break 1024-bit RSA keys at a cost of under $1 million per device." Each dedicated device would be able to break a 1,024-bit key in one year, he said.
- nathan_long 13y agoThen use 2048. Each additional bit doubles the effort required.
- marshray 13y agoNo, asymmetric crypto keys don't work that way.
- declan 13y agoYup. Brute-forcing a 1,024-bit key is about a thousand times as difficult as a 768-bit key, not 2^256 as hard. In any case, major Internet companies have either moved to longer SSL keys or have announced plans to do so.
- nathan_long 13y agoOh! Thanks for correcting me.