Recommended key size for life long key

Ingo Klöcker kloecker at
Sun Sep 8 00:06:48 CEST 2013

On Saturday 07 September 2013 23:35:08 Ole Tange wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Ole Tange <tange at> wrote:
> > Why not recommend a key size that will not be broken for the rest of
> > your natural life?
> Thanks for all your feed back on the list. I have now summed up the
> concerns raised on the list on
> Feel free to let me know if you feel I have left out important
> concerns.

I see you have checked the influence of large keys on the CPU time 
needed to do key operations on different hardware. But key operations 
with large keys not only cost lots of time (see your numbers on low end 
hardware), but also energy. The additional energy consumption might not 
be relevant ecologically, but I'm pretty sure it's relevant for the 
battery life of your and your communication partners' smart phones. In 
particular, if you and your communication partners use equally large 
keys and encrypt each and every email, SMS, chat message, etc.

Obviously, those concerns might be irrelevant in pratice (e.g. because 
nobody uses encryption anyway).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20130908/f2f7cbef/attachment.sig>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list