advantages/disadvantages of DSA/RSA keys (was: Re: implications of subkeys?)

[disastry@saiknes.lv]

seems I sent to wrong list...
now to correct one :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Ingo Klöcker ingo.kloecker@epost.de wrote:
> On Saturday 02 March 2002 15:21, David Shaw wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 01:51:01PM +0100, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > > On Friday 01 March 2002 20:39, David Shaw wrote:
> > > > Yes.  The algorithm is up to you and what you trust more.  GnuPG
> > > > 1.0.7 gives you the choice between DSA and RSA.  They each have
> > > > advantages and disadvantages.
> > >
> > > Is there somewhere a short but complete list of the advantages and
> > > disadvantages?
> >
> > This is pretty good:
> >      http://www.samsimpson.com/pgpfaq.html
> 
> Thanks. At least from section 8.1 it doesn't seem that RSA keys have any 
> advantages (except the backwards compatibility with plain PGP 2.x).
> Ingo

note that this FAQ was written when there was only v3 RSA keys.

RSA keys have some advantages, at least two:
 they are not limited to 1024 bits like DSA
 they can use hash longer than 160 bits.

__
Disastry  http://disastry.dhs.org/
http://disastry.dhs.org/pgp <----PGP plugins for Netscape and MDaemon
 ^----PGP 2.6.3ia-multi05 (supports IDEA, CAST5, BLOWFISH, TWOFISH,
      AES, 3DES ciphers and MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA2 hashes)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Netscape PGP half-Plugin 0.15 by Disastry / PGPsdk v1.7.1

iQA/AwUBPIMQvDBaTVEuJQxkEQOrpwCgs0UDyUhjSsVolXG3YI63SfB3h/YAnj3J
S33waNVWzt90tC/JZsrXIfVf
=6dWO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----