Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:09:08 -0400
From:      "J. Hellenthal" <jhellenthal@dataix.net>
To:        RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Hardware potential to duplicate existing host keys... RSA DSA ECDSA was Add rc.conf variables...
Message-ID:  <20120625160908.GA85086@DataIX.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120625023104.2a0c7627@gumby.homeunix.com>
References:  <CA%2BQLa9A4gdgPEn3YBpExTG05e4mqbgxr2kJ16BQ27OSozVmmwQ@mail.gmail.com> <86zk7sxvc3.fsf@ds4.des.no> <CA%2BQLa9Dyu96AxmCNLcU8n5R21aTH6dStDT004iA516EH=jTkvQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120625023104.2a0c7627@gumby.homeunix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 02:31:04AM +0100, RW wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 17:23:47 -0400
> Robert Simmons wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>
> > wrote:
> > > Robert Simmons <rsimmons0@gmail.com> writes:
> > >> In light of advanced in processors and GPUs, what is the potential
> > >> for duplication of RSA, DSA, and ECDSA keys at the current default
> > >> key lengths (2048, 1024, and 256 respectively)?
> > >
> > > You do know that these keys are used only for authentication, and
> > > not for encryption, right?
> > 
> > Yes, the encryption key length is determined by which symmetric cipher
> > is negotiated between the client and server based on what is available
> > from the Ciphers line in sshd_config and ssh_config.
> 
> I'm not very familiar with ssh, but surely they're also used for
> session-key exchange, which makes them crucial to encryption. They
> should be as secure as the strongest symmetric cipher they need to work
> with.

This should give you a good outline of it.

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9566

-- 

 - (2^(N-1))



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120625160908.GA85086>