RSA 1024 ridiculous / RSA 8192 sublime, and, possible with gnupg.

[John W. Moore III]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

David Shaw wrote:

> This year is slightly different in that I'm waiting for someone to
> discover they can also raise the key size limit for DSA.  That, at
> least, is marginally less strange as I put in code to make the hash
> size automatically rise as the key size rises.  Using SHA-1 with a
> 8192-bit RSA key is... odd.

Wait No longer.  However, as You point out; Why use a large Key with the
available Hash selections.  Even considering DSA2, Everyone I know has
already begun migration away from DSA to RSA.  Personally, I feel
Compiling GnuPG with the ability to generate an 8192 Key, while amusing,
is akin to selling someone a .22cal hollowpoint weapon instead of a
.45ACP for Personal Defense because it 'kicks' less.

JOHN ;)
Timestamp: Sunday 17 Jun 2007, 18:30  --400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8-svn4511: (MingW32)
Comment: Public Key at:  http://tinyurl.com/8cpho
Comment: Gossamer Spider Web of Trust: http://www.gswot.org
Comment: My Homepage:  http://tinyurl.com/yzhbhx

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJGdbYxAAoJEBCGy9eAtCsPqhYH/2G07aLHAH7uRUiianl9c/VD
rbIoFoAHr1BbnSfH0tzuGippnhZZyOVWqKIMJruTXrebT3jKc+J6FKUbPFMVUbMP
cSr8m7R/+tYBBrN/YIIEPEP7hLgOh92/0P2wR6O4iSu1xTAzJUsgnJc5cpf51/w7
eFOfrOquu6hFkvLbQJtCugZ1Idr/Zuw/PRHl1MkncSXOzBIBQ/tiOnLfIZ0Ym4SN
dxu3prb9D6cbII7Jd7qJvLHVp+rerdTapzsE8PIh2bTBKogqaOokoBzwrZYzjd0h
gPZXEEZ/+446ST2KxA8kOGC7fnhYYu+G4O2rIBGedAL/IlVDm1jU9lLZdLHHrFA=
=usf1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----