[1270] in bugtraq
Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark G. Scheuern)
Wed Mar 15 23:39:59 1995
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 1995 22:32:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "Mark G. Scheuern" <mgscheue@Oakland.edu>
To: Jonathan Cooper <entropy@IntNet.net>
Cc: Vishy Gopalakrishnan <vishy@sph.umich.edu>, bugtraq@fc.net
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.950315203430.27018F-100000@xcalibur>
On Wed, 15 Mar 1995, Jonathan Cooper wrote:
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 1995 20:35:44 -0500 (EST)
> From: Jonathan Cooper <entropy@IntNet.net>
> To: Vishy Gopalakrishnan <vishy@sph.umich.edu>
> Cc: bugtraq@fc.net
> Subject: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!
> You are wrong.
>
> If the key is only 128-bit, that's a much smaller keyspace to
> brute-force attack than a 1024-bit key.
>
> (do the math)
>
> -jon
Okay, let's see. 2^128 = 3.4e38. Suppose you can somehow try one
billion keys per second. Then it will take you 3.4e29 seconds or
about 1e22 years to try every possible key. A shorter length of
time than it would take with a 1024 bit key, but I don't think I'd
lose much sleep over it.
Mark
| Mark G. Scheuern | http://www.acs.oakland.edu/~mgscheue/ |
| mgscheue@oakland.edu | finger mgscheue@vela.acs.oakland.edu |
| MGScheuern@eWorld.COM | 20 67 4B E0 15 5C 7C 87 |
| 73150.1770@compuserve.com | 28 B3 DB BA 63 B1 5F A1 |
