nanog mailing list archives
Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd)
From: Brett Eldridge <brett () atomicgears com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 10:15:14 -0800 (PST)
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Len Sassaman wrote:
I've mailed Theo de Raadt asking if OpenSSH has an undocumented mechanism for specifying minimum permitted key size that I don't know about. If there is one, I'll certainly post a follow-up.
the new CVS versions of OpenSSH (the current portable CVS version doesn't have the changes quite yet) allow you to specify a minimum key lentgh as a #define at compile time. see ssh.h: #define SSH_RSA_MINIMUM_MODULUS_SIZE 768 - brett
Current thread:
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd), (continued)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Len Sassaman (Mar 25)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Deepak Jain (Mar 25)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Len Sassaman (Mar 25)
- Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Brad Barnett (Mar 25)
- Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) David Shaw (Mar 25)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Deepak Jain (Mar 25)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Len Sassaman (Mar 25)
- RE: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Deepak Jain (Mar 25)
- Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 25)
- Re: 1024-bit RSA keys in danger of compromise (fwd) Len Sassaman (Mar 25)