RSA 1024 ridiculous

[Robert Hübener]

Andrew Berg wrote:
> Try signing/encrypting files that are tens, hundreds, or thousands of
> megabytes in size. Sure, your average machine can sign/encrypt
> messages that don't even fill a cluster without breaking a sweat, but
> if the sensitive data is large, RSA-4096 isn't a good choice unless a
> gov't agency wants that data.

The work for the RSA-part of the algorithm is always the same: It only
has to process either the hash of the message/file or the key for the
symmetric cipher.