Safety of the key and it's length

James P. Howard, II jh at
Mon Jan 26 16:06:45 CET 2009

On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:

> Even a small key, 1024 bits, is probably much more secure than you  
> are.
> If your traffic is encrypted with even a 1k key, the likelihood of
> someone attacking your traffic cryptanalytically is about zero.   
> They'll
> decide to try other means instead.
> It's best not to obsess over key size.  Larger is not better, but it's
> not as if it hurts you, either.

There are some ancient keys out there which are 512 bits (and I think  
I've seen smaller).  Are these likely still secure enough to use?

James P. Howard, II, MPA
jh at

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20090126/46afaa0c/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list