-
December 20th, 2002, 09:55 AM
#1
Member
8192 bit encryption?
hey guys what do u think about this.
http://www.bytefusion.com/products/e..._secexmail.htm
they are claiming 8192 bit key size with RSA standard encryption. What do u guys think? Can this replace pgp? The down side is it is only for windows as of now. And although they use twofish open ssl their actual code is not open source...hmmm.... interesting...
i dont know about you but if Im encrypting something i would def. go with open source (gPG), that i know has been viewed and examined by millions over this where i dont know jack about these people or their claims.
Waiting to here your thoughts
-
December 20th, 2002, 03:11 PM
#2
Junior Member
well dude there eather full of crap or they handed there key over to the nsa fbi cse cia and a
few others the laws US and other wise state that u cant make anything that hard to break so
do u want the fbi reading your email? no I didnt think so
old man how is it you hear these things. young man how is it that you do not.
-
December 20th, 2002, 05:16 PM
#3
well remember this, the larger the key the more encryption overhead you have which means more CPU usage. An 8192 bit key would probably make most peoples CPU's croak.
I haven't read the article yet so I'll get right on that and make more comments later
El Diablo
-
December 24th, 2002, 06:19 PM
#4
Member
There is some truth in their claim but i m afraid that is not too much! somebody over 'ere at the HAF (Hellenic Air Force) Computer Department claims that it indeed uses some if not all PGP and then something more.
the point is that if the phrase is weak,or can be weakened, it can be "easily" broken into. in other words it seems that its not what it seems.
sorry to dissapoint you but over here the encryption level is even higher in some cases. =D
I don\'t wanna grow up change my skateboard for a tie
-
December 25th, 2002, 06:25 AM
#5
Senior Member
"and then all the encrytion breakers of the world screamed out in pain"
i need that kinda power it will come very handy
--=::[ LeNc}{ ]::=-- stealing your time for pathetic web sites since 1998
-
December 28th, 2002, 01:43 AM
#6
Junior Member
-
December 28th, 2002, 02:42 AM
#7
8192? The least of our worries, IMHO.
Most of the things "you and i and our companies" need to encrypt have a relatively short valuable lifespan. They would not be worth the resources to "crack" when encrypted with basic 128-bit encryption, especially using a reasonable key. In fact, should one actually take the original message,
poly-alphabetize the original text then encrypt that resulting cipher text with your PGP V-7.02, we'd all be pushing up daisies before anyone who was interested in what we wrote, and had sufficient equipment to crack it, could sort it all out.
-
December 28th, 2002, 03:13 AM
#8
Last week this was discussed in the comp.security.misc newsgroup and one of the project engineers joined in to give a little more information. You might be interested in reading what he had to say.
http://www.der-keiler.de/Newsgroups/...2-12/0349.html
If you receive something that says \'Send this to everyone you know,\' pretend you don\'t know me.
-
December 28th, 2002, 06:25 AM
#9
Originally posted here by magnoon
Last week this was discussed in the comp.security.misc newsgroup and one of the project engineers joined in to give a little more information. You might be interested in reading what he had to say.
http://www.der-keiler.de/Newsgroups/...2-12/0349.html
A good link, thanks Magnoon, the arguments in the article meets the logic level i can relate to. It was interesting enough that i even went to their ByteFusion site and enjoyed reading about their products including their encrypted email product, available in several flavors from free for non-business home use, up to complete secure email server products. They even had some freebies that sysops might find useful, as well as some other nice server-perks for higher-end hosting. i already have encrypted email capability with PGP, but if i didn't i'd probably download their free version to try it out.
-
December 28th, 2002, 04:29 PM
#10
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|