Re: DH group exchange (Re: SSH key algorithm updates)
"Mark D. Baushke" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.secsh |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Niels Möller <[email protected]> writes: > "Mark D. Baushke" <[email protected]> writes: > > > See also: > > > > http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-107-rev1/sp800-107-rev1.pdf > > Section 4.2 table 1. > > It's not clear to me why the "collision resistance strength" rather > than "preimage resistance strength" or "second preimage strength" apply > when using sha2 for generating session keys and the exchange hash. Looking more carefully at what is being hashed in the exchange, I agree with you that collision resistance strength is not involved here. So, that only leaves open if choosing to use sha256 as a hash for larger diffie-hellman MODP groups... For now, does it seem reasonable to add RFC 3526 group15 & group16 to the protocol? diffie-hellman-group15-sha256 (3072-bit MODP group ~130 bits of security) diffie-hellman-group16-sha256 (4096-bit MODP group ~150 bits of security) I do not see a need at present for using: * group17 (6144-bit MODP group ~170 bits of security) * group18 (8192-bit MODP group ~190 bits of security) IMO, it just takes too long to do calculations with them. -- Mark