128bit, 256bit, 512 encryption

[sonoma1993]

Im not sure is the right form topic section, but hey how come secuirty companies, software, and operating systems companies havent come out with 256bit or an 512 encryption systems for the internet?

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
Im not sure is the right form topic section, but hey how come secuirty companies, software, and operating systems companies havent come out with 256bit or an 512 encryption systems for the internet?

Its creates extra uncessessary bottleneck.

 

[DAGTA]

The simple answer:
1) It's unnecessary for most users and most applications. 128-bit for 'most'.
2) As you increase the bit length, it takes more cpu processing power... so things get slower. Being that anything more than 128-bit is unnecessay for most people in most situations, there is no 'good' reason to further slow things down.

There are exceptions, of course.

 

[sonoma1993]

what do you mean by extra uncessary bottleneck?

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
what do you mean by extra uncessary bottleneck?

Overhead... no real statistical gain for the extra computation.

 

[TallBill]

Q: how long would it take someone to crack 128 bit encryption?

When the press talks about "cracking" or "breaking" an encryption algorithm. They always seem to mean this: the "attacker" decrypted a message by guessing the secret key that was used for the encryption. This is not breaking or cracking a particular algorithm. But it does demonstrate the importance of key size. The key size -- the number of bits used to store the key, which is an integer number -- determines the size of the key space, the number of possible keys that can be used. If you knew that to decrypt a message you needed to guess a number between 1 and 10, would you feel challenged? How about between 1 and 1000? How about 1 and 1^38 (1 followed by 38 zeros). That is (roughly) the key space using a 128-bit key. For comparison purposes, let?s use a (so far) non-existent computer that can guess 1 trillion (1 followed by 12 zeroes) keys a second. On average, it would take around 2 million million million (2 followed by 18 zeroes) years to guess the key.



Thats plenty secure enough for me. Extra calculations slow down the decryption process which is pointless.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Folks have come out with it. I use a 2048-bit encryption for one of my government websites, and that's just external for vendors. Can you imagine what's running at NSA HQ over at Fort Meade?

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
what do you mean by extra uncessary bottleneck?

link

This is only for 72 bit encryption, you can see the problem with trying to brute force RSAs code. Encrypting anything higher than 128 is really not going to be nescessary for quite some time.

 

[sonoma1993]

thanks guys, i was just curious im just started working on my degree for computer networking systems.

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: Nik
Folks have come out with it. I use a 2048-bit encryption for one of my government websites, and that's just external for vendors. Can you imagine what's running at NSA HQ over at Fort Meade?

aren't you supposed to say WRONG FORUM?

 

[Legendary]

Originally posted by: TallBill
How about 1 and 1^38 (1 followed by 38 zeros).

Uhhhhh....
Might want to check your calculator TallBill. :beer:😀

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Legendary

Originally posted by: TallBill
How about 1 and 1^38 (1 followed by 38 zeros).

Uhhhhh....
Might want to check your calculator TallBill. :beer:😀

I just copied from a website chief.. you think im even close to smart enough to know about encryption?

 

[biggestmuff]

software encryption? Bwa-ha-ha!!! Try using dedicated hardware.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Legendary

Originally posted by: TallBill
How about 1 and 1^38 (1 followed by 38 zeros).

Uhhhhh....
Might want to check your calculator TallBill. :beer:😀

I just copied from a website chief.. you think im even close to smart enough to know about encryption?

1^38 = 1^eleventybillion = 1^1 = 1 🙂

Prolly supposed to say 10^38

But yeah, if I went out and spent $20 million on computer hardware, I could crack the 128 bit key from one of someone's online banking sessions, get their account number and password and clean out their account of $232.54. 😛

 

[Reel]

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
Im not sure is the right form topic section, but hey how come secuirty companies, software, and operating systems companies havent come out with 256bit or an 512 encryption systems for the internet?

I am not sure come out with it is the right term. I believe that the most commonly used encryption algorithms aren't length dependent. They use a fixed length in their process as a standard but could be easily extended beyond that number of bits. As to why they aren't extended, see above.