Re: DH group exchange (Re: SSH key algorithm updates)

"Mark D. Baushke" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.secsh
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Niels =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6ller?= <[email protected]> writes:

> "Mark D. Baushke" <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > 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 securit=
> y)
> >   diffie-hellman-group16-sha256 (4096-bit MODP group ~150 bits of securit=
> y)
> 
> I think it makes sense. It's good to have some specified algorithms
> with security a bit beyond what's currently used, to make it easy to
> move if/when needed attacks on the current algorithms emerge.

Agreed.

> Next question is what status they should have. I think it makes sense to
> have group15 as RECOMMENDED.

I agree with this suggestion.

> (By the same argument, I think it makes sense to specify some
> alternative to sha256 too, which I guess would be either sha512 or
> sha3-384 (sha384 makes litte sense to me, since it's essentially a
> truncated sha512, with same performance and shorter output)).

Given your point about sha2-384, I think there are three possibilities
that remain:

  sha2-512
  sha3-256
  sha3-512

There are aguments both in favor and against each of the alternatives.

fwiw: I have no idea if the SSH community is ready to consider the use
of sha3 (FIPS PUB 202 style) at this time, but it is more likely to
be a challenge to the attacks on diffie-hellman I heard of to date.

	-- 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.