Re: RSA moduli sizes
- From: tom@xxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 02:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 1, 3:05 am, Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demun...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
t...@xxxxxxx writes:
On Mar 31, 6:00 pm, Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demun...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
t...@xxxxxxx writes:
On Mar 30, 7:52 pm, pubkeybreaker <pubkeybrea...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 30, 3:13 pm, t...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Mar 30, 12:50 pm, pubkeybreaker <pubkeybrea...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I have to agree with Paulo on this one. You're splitting hairs
here. An AES key is technically a bit string, yes.
But so is an RSA key for that matter.
No, IT IS NOT.
This is why I must insist upon "splitting hairs" as you call it.
You still don't get it. A bit strong need not have the most
significant
bit equal to 1. an RSA key MUST.
No, it doesn't. I could store an RSAPublicKey [PKCS #1 ASN.1
sequence] with a leading bit of zero in the modulus all I wanted.
It'd still be imported (provided no more than 6 zero bits were present
otherwise it wouldn't be DER) by any compliant PKCS #1 library. The
math still works, etc, and so on.
I agree the nomenclature is that a n-bit RSA key has the n-1th bit of
the modulus set. What I'm saying is if I handed you, say 128 bytes
where the 1023rd bit wasn't 0, the math should still work just fine
provided your messages are not 1024 bits long.
And for that matter, RSA will work if you pass leading zero bits as
your modulus, [or at least most math libraries can cope with that].
Which is IRRELEVANT for determining the SIZE of the key.
I AGREE! BIG FONT TEXT MEANS I'M SERIOUS!
It does mean [as Paulo posted] that your message sizes become smaller
as a result.
So you're all saying the same thing, just talking past one another.
No, I am not.
Ok, you're not.
Whatever.
Tom
There can only be one Tom with that posting style - long time no see....
Yeah, I'm "back". I'll try to cool my jets and not get involved in as
many "trouble" threads as before, but the first sign of trouble and
I'm heading for the hills. :-)
Tin pot on the head, and charging straight for Bob - what a start!
Technically I was trying to point out that they were both talking to
the same points more or less. I know better than to take on Bob,
since he's more often than not, dead on right.
Welcome back, if you kiboize, you'll see you've been missed.
Perhaps so, I'm not back in the OSS scene though, might revive that in
the future, It's a bit awkward with what I do for a living though
(some conflict there), also I'm a complete music nutter now too. I've
spent the last two and a bit years studying piano in my spare time, so
it's not like I have the time anyways.
Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- From: robdevloper
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- References:
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- From: tom
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: RSA moduli sizes
- Prev by Date: Cypher Resistant to Differential Cryptanalysis
- Next by Date: Re: Why my code is slower and why it can't be significantly sped up.
- Previous by thread: Re: RSA moduli sizes
- Next by thread: Re: RSA moduli sizes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|