Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Mark G. Scheuern: "Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!"
• Previous message: Thomas S. Hayward: "Mailing list request to join"
• In reply to: Vishy Gopalakrishnan: "Re: Lotus Notes Encryption Methods"
• Next in thread: Mark G. Scheuern: "Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!"

> Correct me if I am wrong - RC2 and RC4 are not public key cyrptosystems,
> and hence are not "prone" to the problems with low moduli.

   You are wrong.

   If the key is only 128-bit, that's a much smaller keyspace to 
brute-force attack than a 1024-bit key.

   (do the math)

-jon

( --------[ Jonathan D. Cooper ]--------[ entropy@intnet.net ]-------- )
( PGP 2.6.2 keyprint: 31 50 8F 82 B9 79 ED C4  5B 12 A0 35 E0 9B C0 01 )
( home page: http://taz.hyperreal.com/~entropy/ ]---[ Key-ID: 4082CCB5 )

• Next message: Mark G. Scheuern: "Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!"
• Previous message: Thomas S. Hayward: "Mailing list request to join"
• In reply to: Vishy Gopalakrishnan: "Re: Lotus Notes Encryption Methods"
• Next in thread: Mark G. Scheuern: "Re: Non-PK encryption not vulnerable via low key length?!"