Re: [tor-talk] NSA supercomputer

[Bernard Tyers <ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

That's what I was thinking, I just didn't know if there was another reasons.

I guess the key size is configured on the Tor node? I haven't found it anywhere in the configuration (I'm using TBB on OS X).

Is it possible to increase the size of the key, if say I've got a big server running as a node?

If there are nodes using different length keys, is the security relying on the node with the smallest key length?

Thanks.

Bernard

----
Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and (possible) misspelling.

Alexandre Guillioud <guillioud.alexandre@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>The bigger the key is, the longer (cpu cycle) it take to encrypt/decrypt ?
>
>Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, Bernard Tyers a Ãcrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher is not used?
>> Do higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bernard
>>
>>
>> ----
>> Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and (probable)
>> misspelling.
>>
>> George Torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>
>> a second guess would be going after 1024 bit keys.
>> there is also a video on youtube from a recent con about the feasibility of
>> factoring them, <"fast hacks" or something like that> at the end, jacob
>> applebaum asks about it and they advise him to use longer keys or elliptic
>> curves crypto.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tor-talk mailing list
>> tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <javascript:;>
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>>
>_______________________________________________
>tor-talk mailing list
>tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk