Re: DSA and ElGamal key length nomenclature

Paulo Barreto (pbarreto@nw.com.br)
Wed, 07 Apr 1999 22:36:42 -0300

• Next message: Alex Alten: "Re: Vernam Cipher"
• Previous message: David Honig: "Re: False sense of security (re: Snake oil...)"
• In reply to: Daniel J. Frasnelli: "False sense of security (re: Snake oil...)"
• Next in thread: Ian Goldberg: "Re: DSA and ElGamal key length nomenclature"

At 09:45 1999.04.07 -0400, Ge' Weijers wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 06, 1999 at 10:26:12PM -0300, Paulo Barreto wrote:
>> Aha! But you could equally vote for the length of x, as that seems to
>> determine the work factor for an attacker as long as p is in a suitable
>> range (for instance, it's futile to choose |p| = 2048 while keeping |q| =
>> 160).
>
>I'm sure marketing departments will vote for the larger number.

Then read the technical specs before buying their product, unless you don't
care to be fooled.

>I'm sure that we won't see 'equivalent to an 80-bit symmetric key' in any
>4-color glossy brochures.

Alas, that's true.

Paulo.

• Next message: Alex Alten: "Re: Vernam Cipher"
• Previous message: David Honig: "Re: False sense of security (re: Snake oil...)"
• In reply to: Daniel J. Frasnelli: "False sense of security (re: Snake oil...)"
• Next in thread: Ian Goldberg: "Re: DSA and ElGamal key length nomenclature"