RSA 4096 ridiculous? (was RSA 1024 ridiculous)

[Robert J. Hansen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

> What I was trying to do was bring a real world perspective to
> this question. Are you using PGP 8?  Do you know anybody who
> is using PGP 8?

Yes and yes.

I far prefer PGP 8.1 over PGP 9.0+, and I've heard comments from many  
other users who say likewise.  The thing which is killing PGP 8.1 is  
its lack of support for creating SHA256 messages, not its age.

> Since PGP 8 was released in December 2002 and nothing has been
> done with it for 4-1/2 years now, it is getting pretty long in
> tooth.

Many people still use PGP 6.5.8, which dates back to pre-2000.

>   PGP Corporation is up to at least PGP 10.x the last time
> I checked (last year).

PGP 9.6 is the latest.

- --
Robert J. Hansen <rjh at sixdemonbag.org>

"Most people are never thought about after they're gone.  'I wonder
where Rob got the plutonium?' is better than most get." -- Phil Munson



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)

iFYEAREIAAYFAkZ5X0MACgkQf2XByo0Cu7PxqwDeK9GRjV6j4Ho2YIKmba0aVWZK
HaHgMWbXDHsAVADeOK8A9lkXh6s5Tl9H1BPTOLHBdj1r5WI1jSLD+4kBHAQBAQgA
BgUCRnlfQwAKCRC3APSC/q+BCd0GCADhC4RDSzChe0mB7j3ogPR49dOH9vlK92v1
fv/NXqPCGv7D8oa5R4cPYpsleL84Kmx6M1+6yqeGt42jz2s4B+yAK6KJ4UFM2kKY
lI+bU6QTBf0eLtndSCwaNTARUSYly8ywZGlKoaGuS0zddWff0lmbtQbHabHUBxlE
PdaIvPb+nBxhxfaShoBi5vFZdhAQV6sWrRbxblr1NTRq8iPBlPZDHBDMpw+wVbQ3
ZDXmHYfJZb9/oIeSEJoiwiFfU3eb+Opix6KvArHYP5oTmSr5F3xplKy/+J7aGW6Z
vggHFWjH5SmJv3Zp82wxqWsW6Qpnocge4wzj6uJXRbK9gCHJFgpu
=eE9A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----