From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 24 19:14:53 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9972E106567D
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:14:53 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu)
Received: from hergotha.csail.mit.edu
	(wollman-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net
	[IPv6:2001:470:1f06:ccb::2])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42F118FC12
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:14:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from hergotha.csail.mit.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by hergotha.csail.mit.edu (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5OJEp2M037475; 
	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu)
Received: (from wollman@localhost)
	by hergotha.csail.mit.edu (8.14.5/8.14.4/Submit) id q5OJEpFC037472;
	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:14:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <20455.26411.117114.791974@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:14:51 -0400
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: "J. Hellenthal" <jhellenthal@dataix.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120624185217.GA11320@DataIX.net>
References: <CA+QLa9CX26xEwRsz3g6FvBBbbFE0Gfw+UR6_RHYOXgZFcgCw5w@mail.gmail.com>
	<4828EFCC-E60A-4961-9228-4A1ADAD28F73@lists.zabbadoz.net>
	<20120624165920.GA85913@DataIX.net>
	<CA+QLa9C04d3fkk6r2apLti4vn+J8_fai--qK2yQobmXD+bdTww@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120624181543.GA3652@DataIX.net>
	<CA+QLa9BGW6=kpNfLZ+hkUiaWEHgcxCaQAG4ceGEtNZtNwsHejw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120624185217.GA11320@DataIX.net>
X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 22) "Instant Classic" XEmacs Lucid
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
	(hergotha.csail.mit.edu [127.0.0.1]);
	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED
	autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on
	hergotha.csail.mit.edu
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:50:14 +0000
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Add rc.conf variables to control host key length
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:14:53 -0000

<<On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:52:17 -0400, "J. Hellenthal" <jhellenthal@dataix.net> said:

> 2048 is well more than efficient. Speaking soley for RSA in that matter.

I asked R. about that a few months back, and he expressed the view
that 2,048 bits is the *minimum* RSA key size anyone should consider
using at this point.  I'm willing to take his word for it.

-GAWollman