Date: 29 Aug 2002 10:10:28 -0400 From: Petr Swedock <petr@blade-runner.mit.edu> To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> Cc: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <karsten@rohrbach.de>, mipam@ibb.net, Matthias Buelow <mkb@mukappabeta.de>, Stefan =?iso-8859-1?q?Kr=FCger?= <skrueger@europe.com>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, tech-security@netbsd.org, misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd) Message-ID: <86hehdbvsb.fsf@blade-runner.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <87bs7ln66u.fsf@snark.piermont.com> References: <20020828200748.90964.qmail@mail.com> <3D6D3953.6090005@mukappabeta.de> <20020828224330.GE249@localhost> <87k7mamc2s.fsf@snark.piermont.com> <20020829091232.A53344@mail.webmonster.de> <87bs7ln66u.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> writes: > "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <karsten@rohrbach.de> writes: > > I would have thought spending at least hundreds of millions off > dollars and (as importantly) at least months of time would have been > considered "unattractive" enough to encourage other methods of getting > at your data like breaking in to your physical location. Silly me. I > guess I missed the concept behind crypto. The concept behind crypto is to confuse, scramble and obfuscate. When it was first designed for and employed in computers the existing mathematical models, computer muscle and modes of analysis were thought to assure unbreakability. Now the use has morphed into a race condition where present mathematical models and future computer muscle, coupled with existing modes of analysis are thought to assure breakability. Peace, Petr To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86hehdbvsb.fsf>