<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Sep 9, 2013, at 2:49 PM, Stephen Farrell <<a href="mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie">stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On 09/09/2013 05:29 PM, Ben Laurie wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Perry asked me to summarise the status of TLS a while back ... luckily I<br>don't have to because someone else has:<br><br><a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sheffer-tls-bcp-00">http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sheffer-tls-bcp-00</a><br><br>In short, I agree with that draft. And the brief summary is: there's only<br>one ciphersuite left that's good, and unfortunately its only available in<br>TLS 1.2:<br><br>TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256<br></blockquote><br>I don't agree the draft says that at all. It recommends using<br>the above ciphersuite. (Which seems like a good recommendation<br>to me.) It does not say anything much, good or bad, about any<br>other ciphersuite.<br><br>Claiming that all the rest are no good also seems overblown, if<br>that's what you meant.</blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>I retract my previous "+1" for this ciphersuite. This is hard coded 1024 DHE and 1024bit RSA. </div><div><br></div><div>From </div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_size">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_size</a></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">As of 2003 RSA Security claims that 1024-bit RSA keys are equivalent in strength to 80-bit symmetric keys</blockquote></blockquote><br></div><div>80 bit strength. Hard coded key sizes. Nice. </div><div><br></div><div>AES 128 with a key exchange of 80 bits. What's a factor of 2^48 among friends…. </div><div><br></div><div>additionally, as predicted in 2003… <br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; ">1024-bit keys are likely to become crackable some time between 2006 and 2010 and that</span></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; ">2048-bit keys are sufficient until 2030.</span></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; ">3072 bits should be used if security is required beyond 2030</span></blockquote></blockquote></div><div>They were off by 3 years.</div><div><br></div><div>What now? </div></body></html>