But why not go further? What experts have to say about bit keys varies greatly:. But you may not be sure of the extent of each of these these effects. So: let's measure all these things.
Unlike traditional symmetric algos, asymettric algos like RSA unfortunately don't double in strength when you add a single bit. The NIST says they're using 'currently known methods' to build their data, but some clever folk on Crypto Stack Exchange worked out that the NIST data appears to use an algorthm to calculate the complexity of using a factoring attack called the 'number field sieve' by Dutch cryptographer Arjen K. This is handy, since the NIST recommendation doesn't include every key size.
If you felt like firing up Mathematica, we could get results for, eg, a bit RSA key with:. You can use this to measure RSA strength in node. The results show a bit RSA key is equivalent to around 'bits' of a symmetric algo. Actually, Note that NIST also round the GNFS complexity's result down to bits, a common symmetric cipher size, to allow people to apply the same policies they would if they were considering symmetric algorithms.
The GNFS complexity measurement is a heuristic: it's a tool to help you measure the relative strengths of different RSA key sizes but it is not exact. Notwithstanding these limitations, GNFS complexity is the best way to measure the raw strength of asymmetric encryption algorithms like RSA. Bigger RSA key sizes may slow down handshaking from the users point of view. Keep in mind handshakes are brief : after key exchange with RSA, the browser and server have agreed on session key, and a fast symmetric encryption algo like AES is used.
We can also do a more practical test by reconfiguring a webserver with and bits keys and then measuring the SSL handshake time in Chrome:.
Online RSA Encryption, Decryption And Key Generator Tool(Free)
The added latency of the bit key was definitely noticeable, but handshaking was still quite fast. Google want most pages to load within ms, Amazon find that every additional ms causes a drop in sales. Handshakes block everything - if your site is set up correctly, everything will be loaded by HTTPS and not a single resource will start loading until the handshake is complete. Many websites - including ours - have a lot of optimisation to do before handshake latency becomes an issue.
Per the introduction, you should definitely pick at least a bit key: the makers of openssl, Microsoft, and every web browser are pushing you to use a bit key at minimum. On the other hand, what do we think about using a bit key? Is bit RSA horrible and slow?In cryptographykey size or key length is the number of bits in a key used by a cryptographic algorithm such as a cipher. Key length defines the upper-bound on an algorithm's security i. Ideally, the lower-bound on an algorithm's security is by design equal to the key length that is, the security is determined entirely by the keylength, or in other words, the algorithm's design doesn't detract from the degree of security inherent in the key length.
Indeed, most symmetric-key algorithms are designed to have security equal to their key length. However, after design, a new attack might be discovered. For instance, Triple DES was designed to have a bit key, but an attack of complexity 2 is now known i. Triple DES now only has bits of security, and of the bits in the key the attack has rendered 56 'ineffective' towards security. Nevertheless, as long as the security understood as 'the amount of effort it would take to gain access' is sufficient for a particular application, then it doesn't matter if key length and security coincide.
This is important for asymmetric-key algorithmsbecause no such algorithm is known to satisfy this property; elliptic curve cryptography comes the closest with an effective security of roughly half its key length. Keys are used to control the operation of a cipher so that only the correct key can convert encrypted text ciphertext to plaintext. Many ciphers are actually based on publicly known algorithms or are open source and so it is only the difficulty of obtaining the key that determines security of the system, provided that there is no analytic attack i.
The widely accepted notion that the security of the system should depend on the key alone has been explicitly formulated by Auguste Kerckhoffs in the s and Claude Shannon in the s ; the statements are known as Kerckhoffs' principle and Shannon's Maxim respectively.
A key should, therefore, be large enough that a brute-force attack possible against any encryption algorithm is infeasible — i. Shannon's work on information theory showed that to achieve so-called perfect secrecythe key length must be at least as large as the message and only used once this algorithm is called the one-time pad. In light of this, and the practical difficulty of managing such long keys, modern cryptographic practice has discarded the notion of perfect secrecy as a requirement for encryption, and instead focuses on computational securityunder which the computational requirements of breaking an encrypted text must be infeasible for an attacker.
Encryption systems are often grouped into families. Common families include symmetric systems e. AES and asymmetric systems e. RSA ; they may alternatively be grouped according to the central algorithm used e. As each of these is of a different level of cryptographic complexity, it is usual to have different key sizes for the same level of securitydepending upon the algorithm used.
For example, the security available with a bit key using asymmetric RSA is considered approximately equal in security to an bit key in a symmetric algorithm. The actual degree of security achieved over time varies, as more computational power and more powerful mathematical analytic methods become available. For this reason, cryptologists tend to look at indicators that an algorithm or key length shows signs of potential vulnerability, to move to longer key sizes or more difficult algorithms.
Cryptography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography. It only takes a minute to sign up. Is it possible to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the private exponent for an RSA key, for example for a key size? In other words, what is the range of values in which the private exponent can occur?
Caveat: RSA might be vulnerable right now to well-funded and competent adversaries. For new applications, it has been deprecated for a decade at least, and RSA is considered OK only till ordepending on source see the Keylength website. Rivest, A. Shamir, and L. Modern cryptography generally chooses a static public exponent. Nowadays this is almost universally the fifth prime of Fermat or F4, or in hexadecimals. From this the private key is calculated given the two prime numbers that are half the size of the key size.
The calculation that is performed can be seen in the answer to Calculating RSA private exponent.
RSA Key Generator
Testing has shown that this value is well distributed within this range. So even if the minimum value is 0, such a small size will never be generated. The private exponent is commonly encoded as a signed big endian number an ASN. This answer doesn't go into ASN. You may need to log such an unlikely event.
The chance that something is wrong is much larger than the chance that such a small private exponent gets calculated. A smaller private exponent does not mean that the private key is less secure. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top.Public Key Cryptography: RSA Encryption Algorithm
What is the minimum and maximum value of an RSA private exponent? Ask Question.You may generate an RSA private key with the help of this tool. Additionally, it will display the public key of a generated or pasted private key. RSA is an asymmetric encryption algorithm. With a given key pair, data that is encrypted with one key can only be decrypted by the other. This is useful for encrypting data between a large number of parties; only one key pair per person need exist.
To generate a key pair, select the bit length of your key pair and click Generate key pair. Depending on length, your browser may take a long time to generate the key pair. A bit key will usually be ready instantly, while a bit key may take up to several minutes.
For a faster and more secure method, see Do It Yourself below. For these steps, you will need a command line shell with OpenSSL.
Ideally, you should have a private key of your own and a public key from someone else. For demonstration, we will only use a single key pair. Run this command to generate a bit private key and output it to the private. Given a private key, you may derive its public key and output it to public.
You may also paste your OpenSSL-generated private key into the form above to get its public key. Base64 Converter Bitcoin Address Generator.
Key Length Generate key pair. Private key. Public key. Generating key pair This may take a few seconds Description RSA is an asymmetric encryption algorithm.
Stack Overflow for Teams is a private, secure spot for you and your coworkers to find and share information. Is there a consensus on the key length one should use, depending on the certificate lifetime? Edit : Like most people, I want my key to be reasonably strong.
I'm not concerned that the NSA could maybe break my key in I just want to know what's the best practice when one plan to do normal business for example an e-commerce site. Most of our applications are a good fit for "bits" of security, so that corresponds to triple-DES or a small bump up to bit AES for symmetric ciphers and a bit key for RSA. See Table 2 for a rough equivalence.
Valid or not, being able to refer them to a NIST publication helps customers feel better about security if they bother to ask. Certificate authorities will not sign csrs less than bits in size so you should generate your csr to be bits. So you might as well start making that your "bare minimum" standard.
For SSL certificates used on websites, this text from the Thawte. I needed to create several new SSL certs and was not satisfied with the answers above because they seemed vague or out dated so I did a little digging.
Bottom line the selected answer is correct use "bit keys Increasing the bit length to adds a potentially meaningful load to your server depending on your existing load while offering basically an insignificant security upgrade.
If you are in a situation where you need longer than a bit key you don't need a longer bit length, you need a new algorithm. Check This link. The end of the SHA-1 signature is nothing new, but Google has accelerated the process of the chrome. In the next few weeks, you should check their SSL certificates. This may be helpful. Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 11 years, 7 months ago. Active 5 months ago. Viewed 86k times. Of course, is probably too weak, and is probably too slow.
Subscribe to RSS
Information Security Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for information security professionals. It only takes a minute to sign up. I have a public key generated with ssh-keygen and I'm just wondering how I get information on the keylength with openssl? If the key is protected by a passphrase you will have to enter that passphrase, of course. If you only have the public key, then OpenSSL won't help directly. You can still do that with OpenSSL the following way:.
Select the first characters of the middle blob after ssh-rsa ; this is Base64 and OpenSSL can decode that:. OpenSSL is picky, it will require that you input no more than 76 characters per line, and the number of characters must be a multiple of 4.
The line above will print out this:. So the key has type RSA, and its modulus has length bytesexcept that the first byte has value "00", so the real length is bytes that first byte was added so that the value is considered positive, because the internal encoding rules call for signed integers, the first bit defining the sign. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. How do I get the RSA bit length with the pubkey and openssl?
Ask Question. Asked 7 years, 1 month ago. Active 5 months ago. Viewed k times. Evan Carroll. Evan Carroll Evan Carroll 2, 4 4 gold badges 19 19 silver badges 25 25 bronze badges. Active Oldest Votes. The line above will print out this: 00 00 00 07 73 73 68 2d 72 73 61 00 00 00 03 B This reads as such: 00 00 00 07 The length in bytes of the next field 73 73 68 2d 72 73 61 The key type ASCII encoding of "ssh-rsa" 00 00 00 03 The length in bytes of the public exponent 01 00 01 The public exponent usuallyas here 00 00 01 01 The length in bytes of the modulus here, 00 c3 a The modulus So the key has type RSA, and its modulus has length bytesexcept that the first byte has value "00", so the real length is bytes that first byte was added so that the value is considered positive, because the internal encoding rules call for signed integers, the first bit defining the sign.
Tom Leek Tom Leek k 25 25 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Wow, that's complex. But, well done. I'd have thought there was a way to read in the key and output all of that stuff. At the crypto level, a RSA public key is a couple of big integers; how to encode a public key into bytes is out of scope of RSA "stricto sensu" and is up to the protocol which uses it.
SSH, X. OpenSSL follows the "X. This answer on Stackoverflow digs into the gory format and binary details. If you really wanted to waste 10 minutes you can use openssl asn1parse -genconf an adapt one of these examples to build a DER format which you can parse with OpenSSL Interesting, can I do it with openssl too, since it is just an rsa public key?
Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook.One of the issues that comes up is the need for stronger encryption, using public key cryptography instead of just passwords. This is sometimes referred to as certificate authentication, but certificates are just one of many ways to use public key technology.
One of the core decisions in this field is the key size. The next most fashionable number after appears to bebut a lot of people have also been skipping that and moving to bit keys. This has lead to some confusion as people try to make decisions about which smartcards to use or which type of CA certificate to use. The discussion here is exclusively about RSA key pairs, although the concepts are similar for other algorithms although key lengths are not equivalent.
So in certain situations, there are some clear benefits of using bit keys and not just jumping on the bit key bandwagon. Many types of public key cryptography, such as X. This is not just a scheme to force you to go back to the certificate authority and pay more money every 12 months.
It provides a kind of weak safety net in the case where somebody is secretly using an unauthorised copy of the key or a certificate that the CA issued to an imposter. However, the expiry doesn't eliminate future algorithmic compromises. If, in the future, an attacker succeeds in finding a shortcut to break bit keys, then they would presumably crack the root certificate as easily as they crack the server certificates and then, using their shiny new root key, they would be in a position to issue new server certificates with extended expiry dates.
Therefore, the expiry feature alone doesn't protect against abuse of the key in the distant future.
It does provide some value though: forcing people to renew certificates periodically allows the industry to bring in new minimum key length standards from time to time.
In practical terms, content signed with a bit key today will not be valid indefinitely. Imagine in the year you want to try out a copy of some code you released with a digital signature in Inthat signature may not be trustworthy: most software in that era would probably see the key and tell you there is no way you can trust it.
The NIST speculates that bit keys will be valid up to about the yearso that implies that any code you sign with a bit key today will have to be re-signed with a longer key in the year You would do that re-signing in the bit twilight period while you still trust the old signature. One of the reasons I decided to write this blog is the fact that some organisations have made the bit keys very prominent although nobody has made them mandatory as far as I am aware.
Debian's guide to key creation currently recommends bit keys although it doesn't explicitly mandate their use.