Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?
From: Shane Hird (shanehird@hotmail.com)
Date: 02/23/03
- Next message: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Previous message: JohnTromaville: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Next in thread: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: JohnTromaville: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: Erwann ABALEA: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Shane Hird" <shanehird@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 13:14:15 +1000
By 6 months, I mean, from a single ~3Ghz PC. It is highly unlikley anyone
will try a distributed attack or use some super computer to break these
keys.
My understanding is ECC is typically more secure than RSA in regards to bits
needed for similar security. How long would a 3Ghz PC take to crack a 128bit
RSA key? a 128bit ECC key (if its possible)?
Thanks
"Tom St Denis" <tomstdenis@iahu.ca> wrote in message
news:3e582160$1_3@news.teranews.com...
>
> "shane" <shanehird@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bb693fad.0302221727.274f070e@posting.google.com...
> > I realise that a 128bit key would be exceptionally weak, but I haven't
> > been able to find out just how weak it is.
> >
> > I am in need of a small public key, which would provide security from
> > a typical user for about 6 months. Security in this situation isn't
> > paramount, 6 months would be plenty enough to deter anyone from
> > bothering to try - more important is the size of the key - it would be
> > great if it could be 128 bits or less.
>
> 6 Months you'd probably need at least ~650 bits or so is my guess [though
I
> wouldn't venture below 1024 bits].
>
> > Can anyone recommend a key size?
> > Or an algorithm? I considered ECC, but it seems to have a minimum of
> > 160bits. Is this the case?
>
> Unless you use ONB [e.g. curves over patented mathematical fields...
shame!]
> ECC is in fact slower than RSA for most processors. Though a ECC-192 op
> over GF(p) is fairly fast [~24ms iirc] on say a Athlon XP.
>
> Tom
>
>
- Next message: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Previous message: JohnTromaville: "Re: looking for research partner [block cipher design]"
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Next in thread: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: JohnTromaville: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Reply: Erwann ABALEA: "Re: 128bit RSA public key - time to break?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|