On 09/09/2013 12:49 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 9/8/2013 6:25 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
he seems to have studiously ignored all of the facts that point to
why what he's trying to do is a bad idea.
Nitpick: I think what he's trying to do (make credible, accurate
long-term projections) is a good idea. I just think he's going about it
in a way that will not give credible or accurate answers, and that as a
result his write-up is rubbish.
I was (sort of) trying to be kind, and I think I made the point at least
obliquely in context; but I'm not sure that someone who doesn't seem to
understand cryptography trying to make long term projections that people
who DO understand it won't make actually IS a good idea. :)
If what you meant was, "It's important for knowledgeable people to
examine how long various key sizes can be expected to remain secure"
then we're in agreement of course. But the blind leading the blind is
never a good idea, and particularly dangerous where complex topics like
crypto are concerned.
Doug
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
