Re: [tor-talk] NSA supercomputer

[george torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

i wasnt going to, but now i have to...
i dont know what tech or knowledge they have.
but i imagine that if you angered them, and they wanted your keys, they
would come and get them.
physically or electronically.
<again, only cause nsa whistle-blowers has said so.>
so lets not speculate :)

i have a lot of faith in the developers, but if you feel that they are
missing something, please find a way to contribute that knowledge to the
project. that way we all benefit.

On 04/04/2013 08:23 AM, Tim wrote:
> Those at the root of the NSA have technology that is far faster and more vast than you imagine it
currently to be. To decrypt keys, It does not take what you might
otherwise expect.
>
> I'm sure one or more of the developers are either in denial or part of
the "security" apparatus or both. I would not hold your breath.
>
> Be well.
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM, George Torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     i may be wrong but:
>     - we are talking about keys of every node along the path. how can you
>     increase that just locally?
>     - keep in mind that we dont know if factoring such a key is
likely, if i
>     remember correctly that talk mentioned huge amounts of computation
power
>     and electricity.
>         something like a year for a 40 mega watt consuming data center
per 1024
>     bit key. <maybe way off, but the point being - its really expensive.>
>         on the other hand its rumored that the utah data center will
have 65
>     mega watts from its own power station.
>     im pretty sure that the developers will move us safely from these
keys as
>     soon as its needed :)
>
>
>     On 4 April 2013 13:54, Bernard Tyers <ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     > 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
<mailto: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 écrit :
>     > >
>     > >> 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
<mailto: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
<mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <javascript:;>
>     > >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>     > >>
>     > >_______________________________________________
>     > >tor-talk mailing list
>     > >tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     > >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > tor-talk mailing list
>     > tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>     >
>     _______________________________________________
>     tor-talk mailing list
>     tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=tydj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk