IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [keyassure] Opening issue #21: "Need to specify which crypto

Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> Tue, 08 March 2011 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir@checkpoint.com>
X-Original-To: keyassure@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: keyassure@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0067A3A6951 for <keyassure@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 12:40:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.565
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9EaODyJqR1z1 for <keyassure@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 12:40:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from michael.checkpoint.com (smtp.checkpoint.com [194.29.34.68]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2E93A6781 for <keyassure@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 12:40:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com (il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com [194.29.34.26]) by michael.checkpoint.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p28KfX1Q010745; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:41:33 +0200
X-CheckPoint: {4D769467-3-1B221DC2-FFFF}
Received: from il-ex03.ad.checkpoint.com (194.29.34.71) by il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com (194.29.34.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:41:33 +0200
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([126.0.0.2]) by il-ex03.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.34.71]) with mapi; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:41:32 +0200
From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 22:41:30 +0200
Thread-Topic: [keyassure] Opening issue #21: "Need to specify which crypto
Thread-Index: Acvd0TUCnQYkmFqCRSWfkMZjzMNC8w==
Message-ID: <7867185F-5D8E-48EA-AE90-57184207CF5A@checkpoint.com>
References: <397794924.536913.1299565388720.JavaMail.root@cm-mail03.mozilla.org> <E971C167-FE76-497D-A156-16EF687B522A@kirei.se> <4D765239.40408@ieca.com> <B99194C1-6A2F-4378-835D-4E1096FB095A@icsi.berkeley.edu> <4D7658AA.9010003@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D7658AA.9010003@vpnc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "keyassure@ietf.org" <keyassure@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [keyassure] Opening issue #21: "Need to specify which crypto
X-BeenThere: keyassure@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Key Assurance With DNSSEC <keyassure.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/keyassure>, <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/keyassure>
List-Post: <mailto:keyassure@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/keyassure>, <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 20:40:23 -0000

On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:26 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> On 3/8/11 8:10 AM, Nicholas Weaver wrote:
>> (Not that I'm saying it should impede this group, I'm happing with the language above or similar, I just want to know why people want to use SHA-384 instead of SHA-512!)
> 
> There is some reason to believe that the final SHA-3 spec will have a 
> 384-bit hash that will be faster to calculate than the 512-bit version, 
> and it will be hard to convince people who were using SHA-2-512 that 
> going to SHA-3-384 is a good move. They'll claim that it is less safe 
> because they didn't realize that they didn't even need the strength in 
> SHA-2-256 to start with.

That would explain the relatively slow adoption of ECDSA. I want my 2048 bits of security.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email