add subkey vs generate new set?
werewolf6851 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 17 16:19:53 CEST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I was just wandering, as I did use the 'default' settings for the key
creation. But that was 4 years ago :)
The info at the time if I remember right went on 1024 was more on the
'higher' side of the processor abilities etc lol
===== Instant Messenger Accounts ======
MSN: lover_of_lycra at hotmail.com
GPG key 76E6C1BC with following fingerprint
D508 2C9D B3A9 2F0E E472 95A8 2D8C B9E6 76E6 C1BC
Inara: "You could always pray they make it back safely."
Book: "I don't think the captain would much like me praying for him."
Inara: "So don't tell him. I never do."
--Episode #2, "The Train Job"
David Shaw wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Werewolf wrote:
>> Another Pondering as every year need bigger bit sized keys to be secure
>> Benefits and Cons
>> Wondering if adding a bigger encryption/signing sub keys to current key
>> on keyserver leaves the benefit keeping the same finger print? So don't
>> have inform all your corresondences to get a new key from you? They
>> just have --refresh their public keyrings
>> Just setting old key to expire and Generate a new set, collect
>> signatures again, change info on web pages and/or bussiness cards?
> It depends on how many signatures you have. If you have none, or just a
> handful that could be easily gotten again, then it doesn't matter much.
> Otherwise, there is a real benefit to adding subkeys to your existing key.
> It is not true, though, that you need continually bigger keys to be
> secure. You just need (somewhat) bigger keys than the current best
> attack to be secure. The default size in GPG is 2048, which is
> extremely safe. When in doubt, use the default.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Portable Thunderbird version 188.8.131.52 (20080914)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users