Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing? - PGP

This is a discussion on Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing? - PGP ; As well know the user can choose between RSA and DH/DSS key pair generation in PGP. Are there statistics how much existing key pairs belong to the RSA type and how much to the DH/DSS type? Towards which key pair ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

  1. Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    As well know the user can choose between RSA and DH/DSS key pair generation in PGP.

    Are there statistics how much existing key pairs belong to the RSA type and how much
    to the DH/DSS type?

    Towards which key pair type is the trend going during the last years ?

    If possible an additional statistic about the key lengths would be interesting.

    Rod

  2. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    On 2005-12-05 06:54:18 -0500, rnewton12@yahoo.com (Rod Newton) said:

    > As well know the user can choose between RSA and DH/DSS key pair
    > generation in PGP.
    >
    > Are there statistics how much existing key pairs belong to the RSA type
    > and how much
    > to the DH/DSS type?
    >
    > Towards which key pair type is the trend going during the last years ?
    >
    > If possible an additional statistic about the key lengths would be interesting.
    >
    > Rod


    The trend, in my opinion..., seems to be RSA. Not to mention it is the
    current default key of PGP Corp and is used by most Social Engineers.
    :-) Both are great, However, I would roll the dice with what the boys @
    MIT built. It's Proven! Last..., why take a chance with something NSA
    Built. Especially with operation "CYBEI2:STOI2M" still in progess...

    1. RSA: - Created in 1977 by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Len Adleman at MIT.
    2. DH/DSS: - Created by David W. Kravitz, @ NSA.

    >>> Cheers <<<


    --
    > B4.U "C-R-A-$-H" Hit:S@VE + BackUp. <



  3. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    El Gamal (what PGP inaccurately calls "Diffie-Hellman") and DSA (what
    PGP inaccurately calls DSS) are both part of the El Gamal family of
    algorithms, discovered by Taher El Gamal in 1984.

    The El Gamal families are not the 'inventions' of the NSA in any
    meaningful sense.

    There are also some moderately strong lines of reasoning supporting the
    proposition that El Gamal is based upon a harder mathematical problem
    than RSA is based upon.


  4. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Mixminion
    server at mercurio.mixmaster.it. If you do not want to receive
    anonymous messages, please contact mercurio-admin@mixmaster.it

    -----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
    Message-type: plaintext

    In <1141694801.475449.182350@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups. com> "Robert J. Hansen" wrote:
    >El Gamal (what PGP inaccurately calls "Diffie-Hellman") and DSA (what
    >PGP inaccurately calls DSS) are both part of the El Gamal family of
    >algorithms, discovered by Taher El Gamal in 1984.
    >
    >The El Gamal families are not the 'inventions' of the NSA in any
    >meaningful sense.
    >
    >There are also some moderately strong lines of reasoning supporting the
    >proposition that El Gamal is based upon a harder mathematical problem
    >than RSA is based upon.
    >
    >


    What about the lack of a 'hash function firewall' that I've seen you write so much about?

    That makes RSA preferable to me in spite of El Gamal's allegedly harder math.

    -----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----

  5. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    On 2006-03-06 20:26:41 -0500, "Robert J. Hansen" said:

    > El Gamal (what PGP inaccurately calls "Diffie-Hellman") and DSA (what
    > PGP inaccurately calls DSS) are both part of the El Gamal family of
    > algorithms, discovered by Taher El Gamal in 1984.


    Thanks for the correction. Just curious, why would they call it something else?

    >
    > The El Gamal families are not the 'inventions' of the NSA in any
    > meaningful sense.


    My understading is that it is a different algorithm and has it's own
    patent assigned to: USA, Secretary of Commerce. (I guess it would not
    be ethical if it wore assigned to NSA ;-) But David W. Kravitz (NSA
    employee) is credited.

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/5,231,668

    maybe

    the whole: "Its not the inventor, but the explorer".

    >
    > There are also some moderately strong lines of reasoning supporting the
    > proposition that El Gamal is based upon a harder mathematical problem
    > than RSA is based upon.


    That's good to know, however isn't the question about trend? There are
    alot of RSA keys out there. Thanks.

    On another note; Good luck with your GUI dude. Look forward to what
    you guys come up with and I think its great that you are going to
    release under creative commons. My only advice; "make something great:"
    and KISS (as the old saying goes; keep it simple stupid). Last, make
    sure your graphics are "off the hook". No cheesy windows stuff. Count
    me in, if you need creative direction (look and feel) . We're rooting
    for you !

    Cheers.


    --
    > B4.U "C-R-A-$-H" Hit:S@VE + BackUp. <



  6. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    > What about the lack of a 'hash function firewall' that I've
    > seen you write so much about?


    That only applies to OpenPGP's implementation of DSA.


  7. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    > why would they call it something else?

    PGP Corporation has a long history of naming things what they want to
    name it, and not what it's actually named. For instance, PGP 9.x calls
    SHA512 SHA-2-512, SHA384 SHA-2-384, and SHA256 SHA-2-256. I've heard
    people call the new SHAs the "SHA2 family" when speaking about all of
    them as a unit, but when talking about a particular version, the names
    are well-known. According to NIST, they're SHA512, SHA384 and SHA256.
    Why PGP insists on renaming them is something I don't understand.

    Likewise with calling it "Diffie-Hellman encryption", when it's really
    El Gamal.

    And similarly, they've declared SHA-1 to be "partially deprecated".
    Maybe I'm just dumb, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it
    means to be "partially deprecated". Either something is deprecated or
    else it's not. If they wanted to say "SHA-1 is deprecated for these
    purposes, and it's not deprecated for these other purposes", that would
    be fine... but "partial deprecation", by itself, is entirely useless:
    it doesn't give me any useful information.

    > Good luck with your GUI dude.


    Thanks. However, a word of warning: we're not looking at producing
    anything more than a proof of concept. The final code is going to be
    GPLed, with the survey responses and our human-interface data Creative
    Commonsed, so that hopefully people can take our research and take it
    farther.


  8. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: RIPEMD160

    Robert J. Hansen skrev:
    > El Gamal (what PGP inaccurately calls "Diffie-Hellman") and DSA (what
    > PGP inaccurately calls DSS) are both part of the El Gamal family of
    > algorithms, discovered by Taher El Gamal in 1984.


    It isent inaccurately that PGP calls it DSS (Digital Signature Standard)
    Because DSA can be used under the DSS standard, but to minimize the
    confusion they could call it DSA(DSS) or something...

    Ill put a request in the PGP forum to include some detailed
    information on theese names in the PGP documentation.

    - --
    Regards,
    Jorgen Lysdal
    PGP Key:
    https://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/Downlo...2C82383950F936

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)

    iQIVAwUBRBdSKrUsgjg5UPk2AQMzMQ//UhDOWOO40CVHz40lbAR0JuOLngOLlZnh
    nUhIpryPzpMvXtRnZZIxRtjy0XU3koJKghMOf8W+1fwUwvYDz7 Wy3R/DIuMEi774
    pKZspPS3bxNRWQuLZEWYHTead5g9P1Eaby98Vq1mPGL9MJIpUV/WVjTawuwJlIkm
    +BKYQU0V7IhcAHks1WCay+w9ek9p6FZTyod9ZC0ZoBdr6PJAEZ F210I+JfXNY9ec
    zGbBcllIjfJW8+wZui0Gm9Zna7tHf4hgZdhlHNDg95X9CMu3WM mpfbl25XJMRVwf
    9CzFXIDwvy0zbvyMXBhuN6l/h9rZbd1OhB6N1jIV7vExeAVkcFAzfNDEgUzP/+ti
    HjqxLae6tFG0VXq8DK5/0WRR7wYpCQ+DGXbGXonzqgZAjcpT2luqXSVPq7Ao7ptC
    VHYp1avXjtJfniFbhA9bkTjSVkXTxjXQ1KMnJ+LFsAA7Xa0Lvl cExPynbPWnO+7c
    Y5Y/rGcEVSzc7dFwkN0LuDSlbfKgh7Ts6SpUirqJfY39pE6sxzA4qk 097NzhC8bV
    8oPmod4RyLcvxV2OA585qm4wTYjLcuuXRxk1zXn9aKTc9dV2sD KXm0tu1gD+HqaR
    0oSKUPzk/3li0COsxjfFJ6XkYuLBqDADlXXtNK85G2ykXbyqhfGbvonp4DU ggeex
    Ta++ZekP48w=
    =djlp
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  9. Re: Percent usage statistics of RSA vs. DH/DSS PGP keys existing?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: RIPEMD160

    It seems there has been some confusion about theese names,
    The fact is that PGP does not name the crypto algo´s just as they like..
    I recommed to read theese wiki pages:

    Digital Signature Algorithm(DSA)/Digital Signature Standard(DSS):
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...ture_Algorithm

    ElGamal/Diffie-Hellman:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Gamal

    Diffie-Hellman key agreement:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie-..._key_agreement

    - --
    Regards,
    Jorgen Lysdal
    usenet signKey: 0xA6DF18B0
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFEGH0dqzldXabfGLARA5dvAJ9vL/xvZdl4ib8dGPlcke81wSYLsgCg5qpT
    jO//XKh1vhcRPBx2/V2v/wI=
    =jMUW
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

+ Reply to Thread