2011/2/13 Jean-Yves F. Barbier 12ukwn@gmail.com
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:21:10 +0100, Ludolf Holzheid lholzheid@bihl-wiedemann.de wrote:
On Sat, 2011-02-12 14:32:19 +0100, Jean-Yves F. Barbier wrote:
[..]
Hmmm, so it looks like may the entropy may be higher with 2 different
keys.
Yes, but if this was more than a hypothetical problem, there would be a counter for uses of the key and a recommendation to use a new key after a certain number of uses.
For my own security, keys are rotated on a monthly basis.
Yes and, of course, you are sure that your random generator is better than the debian one before may 2008...
Think of how many times the web banking servers use their key ...
I totally agree with this.
Don't be too concerned about that.
Yes, I am, because it is not the bank interests I protect, but mine!
The advantage of this question is it forced me to read more about openssl, and now I think I'm gonna do it by the rules: separating every parts into different files because the exercice is interesting and also because I'll soon need to configurate a larger network of clients.
However, openssl lacks *real long term* security features (why signing into sha1 instead of sha384 or sha512 when it is quite surely already broken by gov Sces?), and is also somehow suspect (remember the 1 line bug that have lasted for a looong time? After disclosure it was fixed but not a word from the team about it and not a line in the changelog too......)
Do you REALLY think that a brute force attack is what someone would use to gain access to YOUR data ?
What I also wouldn't like is somebody record the whole connexion and decode it several years after, once the computer farms power is high enough.
ever heard of 'forward secrecy' ? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_forward_secrecy)