FAQ change, final draft

[MFPA]

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

Hi


On Monday 11 August 2014 at 6:18:33 PM, in
<mid:53E8FAE9.6070709 at sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote:



> That said, many are suggesting     shifting to larger
> keys, and GnuPG will be making such a shift in     the
> near future.

This and the answer below seem slightly contradictory. Or do you mean
that a switch to ECC is equivalent to using much bigger keys?



> Q: Will GnuPG ever support RSA-3072 or RSA-4096 by
> default? A: Probably not.  The future is
> elliptical-curve cryptography,     which will bring a
> level of safety comparable to RSA-16384.     Every
> minute we spend arguing about whether we should change
> the defaults to RSA-3072 or more is one minute the
> shift to     ECC is delayed.  Frankly, we think ECC is
> a really good idea     and we'd like to see it deployed
> as soon as humanly possible.




- --
Best regards

MFPA                    mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net

Editing is a rewording activity
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iPQEAQEKAF4FAlPqbPtXFIAAAAAALgAgaXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3Bl
bnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJBMjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0
N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5pBU4D/1n4jGF6ZyWrgulG7+LhiaHh0QuoiKXK2Or1
ZT1bxL/Jfn9h6ximkCkFF4Gyt4qhiPUt8v+cHSlYw/QFQgc69AurS6gv/awW5OqR
4UbotMX5IEPR2nyzeIAlE5qT95Jp0UZ3yhHSB3uovIHdPo0mJ/jYeCZt64luNCTF
WoFkEi48
=ZQA2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----