|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
RE: [PLUG] PGP ADK Vulnerability.
|
It's also extremely interesting math. Have you read "Implementing Elliptic
Curve Cryptography" by Michael Rosing?
And, you are correct that this is not the first attempt to determine how
strong EC is. The fact is, they chose 106 bit key and stated that it would
12,000 computers a year to solve the code. They then mention that 50,000
computers are available via distributed.net. This, I believe, is an attempt
to dissuade us from using EC (How many people are going to confuse 106 with
160?...I'd suspect quite a few). Fact is, there are still 54 bits of
security between 106 and 160, so the strength of the algorithm is still not
in question.
cjs
-----Original Message-----
From: plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org
[mailto:plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org]On Behalf Of Vik Bajaj
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2000 4:33 PM
To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
Subject: Re: [PLUG] PGP ADK Vulnerability.
On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 04:13:10PM -0400, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> I think it's simply the first finding against EC. EC is new
> enough that it's taken this long for someone to find out a way to
> crack small key length - though it's also been around long enough to
> show that it was HARD to find that hole.
ECC is 15 years old. The mathematics of DLP on elliptic curves
vs. finite fields (for example. ECC vs. DH/ElGamal) has an extremely
long history.
-V.
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|