Re: SERPENT in =?utf-8?q?OpenPGP=3F?=

[Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:33:13 -0700, Jon Callas <jon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> And you're right that there's no guarantee that it's stronger, which is
> probably why no one does it. If someone is worried about RSA-2048 and
> AES-128, then the obvious step up is RSA-4096 and AES-256. Or perhaps
> Elgamal-4096 and Twofish-256. That's easy and you can *measure* how much
> stronger it is.

At least to my (limited) understanding,... it seemed logical that it would
be stronger.
Imagine a quick factorising algorithm would be found,... RSA would be
broken, but ElGamal not automatically,... (at least I've never heard about,
that the factorisation problem can be transformed into the discrete
logarithm problem).


Cheers,
Chris.