Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 04:48:27 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <vfcjir$2gc7o$4@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$26699$6602b79b$4abe425a$df32a923@gnu.rocks>
	<_OmcnZpYmdE-PYX6nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<wwvldyfmenf.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:48:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f4e50c47efa3e669267791fe76a6c176";
	logging-data="2633976"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19NMLw2/5JJoThO4hBk7TRf"
User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1V4EA0rMEG2YmO4v2KQjS7opocU=
Bytes: 1414

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 09:01:24 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> The obvious answer is attacks on weak cryptography. RSA-1024 and DH-1024
> are probably breakable by the biggest SIGINT agencies (and anyone else
> with comparable compute resources: cloud service providers for example).

Weak cryptography is easy to fix. The hard part to fix is weak random 
numbers.