[48804] in Cypherpunks
Re: Lotus Notes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Charlie_Kaufman/Iris.IRIS@iris.com)
Wed Jan 31 10:52:40 1996
From: Charlie_Kaufman/Iris.IRIS@iris.com
To: CypherPunks@toad.com
Date: 31 Jan 96 10:43:06 EDT
Lucky Green wrote:
>
> At 11:09 1/30/96, Charlie_Kaufman/Iris.IRIS@iris.com wrote:
>
> >p.s. re: the fact that it's 64 bits rather than 128. That was the limit on
key
> >size of the crypto software we licensed from a third party. That crypto
> >software also limited us to 760 bit RSA keys.
>
> I find this very interesting. RSA prohibits its licencees from using RSA
> software with truly secure keylenghts. What may have incenitvised them to
> take this bizzare position?
The problem is not with the license, but with the software. And not with the
latest software, but with some antique software we started using a long time
ago (before RSAREF was a twinkle in anyone's eye) when 760 bit RSA keys and 64
bit RC2/RC4 keys seemed impenetrable. Given that interoperability with the
installed base is a higher priority than resistance to some theoretical attack,
we can't increase key sizes until the market rolls over to the latest software.
We do have plans to get there.
--Charlie Kaufman
(charlie_kaufman@iris.com)
PGP fingerprint: 29 6F 4B E2 56 FF 36 2F AB 49 DF DF B9 4C BE E1
