Certicom? [...] [Fwd: NSA Turns To Commercial Software For Encryption]

Dr. Robert J. Harley harley at argote.ch
Sun Oct 26 14:18:11 PST 2003


>Besides 4K-RSA + AES-256 + SHA-256 are all way way way stronger [...]

Amusing that you choose 4K-bit RSA.  Wasn't 2K supposedly to be total
overkill recently?  Actually wasn't 1K supposed to be overkill not
long ago?  Heck 768 seemed extravagant when everyone was on 512.
A mere 15 years ago, 320 bits was thought to be enough.  According to
my logs, here are the > 320-bit factorisations that I ran today:

  572972811505140538587970948254484718069 * 229535232834749685352787191218483748328512852024528924422553
  31051130972407042496629431420168004379 * 22580614860205576513432855281188300547296895576002618168141213
  1651123615682793488297475146389977666821 * 431607931720940152250713570720678507192603271368450344325511
  876748124621739787801748776119951008903 * 625940962036087307316308134093495176626898913441644936896711


A mere 15 years ago, 160-ish bits was thought to be enough for ECC.
Strangely, that's about 50 million times harder than the biggest
cases of ECC broken to date.

R

PS: Oops, another one while I was typing:

  4177340769425990287179093985822571 * 40278974418865128339952649479779348554858008977767026467354360871

     .-.                                                               .-.
    /   \           .-.                                 .-.           /   \
   /     \         /   \       .-.     _     .-.       /   \         /     \
  /       \       /     \     /   \   / \   /   \     /     \       /       \
 /         \     /       \   /     `-'   `-'     \   /       \     /         \
            \   /         `-'                     `-'         \   /
             `-'                                               `-'


More information about the FoRK mailing list