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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.