-
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
-
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 ;)
-
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
-
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
-
"and then all the encrytion breakers of the world screamed out in pain"
i need that kinda power it will come very handy :D
-
:p thats still not anything to worrie bout cause it stands to reson that with a book called cracking des if you adjust the cypher keys which might make you go blind with out the right type of software and a doc in math matics and comp sic then it will still brake it in a bout a year or two hehehe dam it sucks to run a slow hunk of junk like my pc when bruting cypher :D
-
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. :)
-
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
-
Quote:
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. :)
-
:) :) If this is true it will help the multinational corporations communicate. At present we can't send some information via email.
