Re: [tor-talk] NSA supercomputer

[Rick Evans <tmovoice@xxxxxxxxx>]

Cheating is always easier.  What about discouraging the number of exit
routers and salting the network with compromised servers?  That could and
probably already has been done.. So cracking tor becomes relatively trivial
from a government standpoint should they decide it is needed.

Now about message content, one must consider that the job of the NSA must
include designing secure systems for friendly side communications.  If you
are really being honest
with yourself, the modern weapons of today's world are the sphere of
nations not hardly an Individual.  You best bet is common sense.  Even
though you might desire some privacy
damn little is available to you so just get over it. Ever tried to rent a
motel room without an I.D.  Even all the latest James bond movies, the
other guy always knows who he is.  And about half of them knows what he is
up to.



On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Bernard Tyers <ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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> 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
> 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