1024 bit encryption compromised?

[Steve Butler]

We have one client using RSA.  Last fall they moved to 4096 bits due to
rumors about vulnerability at 1024.  We moved to 2048 bit DSA/ELG-E at the
same time.  Perhaps we're just paranoid.

Stephen M Butler
Oracle Administrator
First Choice Health Network
206-268-2309

sbutler@fchn.com GnuPG: 8B17 7384 AB86 D67F 7612 3587 5715 C880 1B32 D54B 
kg7je@attbi.com  GnuPG: 8A25 9726 D439 758D D846 E5D4 282A 5477 0385 81D8 
or kg7je@arrl.net


-----Original Message-----
From: Oyvind A. Holm [mailto:sunny@sunbase.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 8:16 AM
To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Subject: 1024 bit encryption compromised?

[snip]

    According to a security debate sparked off by cryptography expert
    Lucky Green on Bugtraq yesterday, 1,024-bit RSA encryption should
    be "considered compromised".
[snip]

The question is floating around among us -- would it be wise to upgrade
to 2048 bits, or is this just speculations? Now that they're talking
about this, I guess one should be a step ahead of the snoopers --
especially when it comes to the future robustness of the signatures.
[snip]


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.