2048 or 4096 for new keys? aka defaults vs. Debian

[MFPA]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi


On Sunday 27 October 2013 at 6:42:31 AM, in
<mid:526CB5D7.1000802 at sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote:


> The NSA never went public with the precise
> vulnerability in SHA that caused them to develop and
> release SHA-1, but they were quite open and public
> about SHA being insecure and needing to be replaced as
> soon as possible.

Which raises the question in my mind: was SHA really flawed, or was it
advantageous to NSA's purposes to have people use SHA-1 instead?

- --
Best regards

MFPA                    mailto:expires2013 at ymail.com

When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iPQEAQEKAF4FAlJtHXFXFIAAAAAALgAgaXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3Bl
bnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJBMjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0
N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5pHnID/24t3djRhgG9pu/8jVkDw+noV7ePOohzjNnx
NM0r3Aj0uKUBQn6/5cCvfTzUHh7CB942wmeXuE7tAV5nUsRzQ1yGZxRCKcXTBPsO
+tF00uK05ja2PWk4HzXbtrrdniOKipbgt3wQVqNFxbWRYevkdBJJlj3cILpptg0+
KW83g2dG
=WXTB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----