From owner-freebsd-security Thu Aug 29 13:33:58 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3E3737B400 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blade-runner.mit.edu (BLADE-RUNNER.MIT.EDU [18.78.0.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1B343E6A for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:33:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from petr@blade-runner.mit.edu) Received: from blade-runner.mit.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blade-runner.mit.edu (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g7TKbrnY031399; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:37:53 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from petr@blade-runner.mit.edu) Received: (from petr@localhost) by blade-runner.mit.edu (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g7TKbqvv031396; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:37:52 -0400 (EDT) To: "Perry E. Metzger" Cc: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , mipam@ibb.net, Matthias Buelow , Stefan =?iso-8859-1?q?Kr=FCger?= , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, tech-security@netbsd.org, misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: 1024 bit key considered insecure (sshd) 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> <86hehdbvsb.fsf@blade-runner.mit.edu> <87wuq9lovh.fsf@snark.piermont.com> From: Petr Swedock Date: 29 Aug 2002 16:37:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87wuq9lovh.fsf@snark.piermont.com> Message-ID: <861y8h9za8.fsf@blade-runner.mit.edu> Lines: 32 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Perry E. Metzger" writes: > Petr Swedock writes: > > > 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. > > I'm glad you've explained it to me. Glad I could help =-) > > 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. > > So, this means that because a person with a billion in spare change > lying about might (MIGHT!) be able to break a 1024 bit key every year, > we should all panic? I'm quite sure I'm not advocating panic. I'm only addressing your (perhaps flippant) remark about the concept behind crypto: which remark seemed to indicate the existence of a non-nil utility function from the moment crypto was first conceptualized. Peace, Petr To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message