Hacker News Reader

Comment by benlivengood | Hacker News Reader

The only downside to Ed25519 is that it will fall to quantum computing before RSA 4096.

Except nobody knows when that's gonna really happen. I've personally switched to ed25519-sk wherever I could.

Same, the short key looks much nicer and both will fall to quantum anyhow. Haven't run into any incompatibilities among the services I use.

OpenSSH has a post-quantum hybrid algo using SNTRUPrime and ed25519.

> * ssh(1), sshd(8): Add experimental quantum-computing resistant key exchange method, based on a combination of Streamlined NTRU Prime 4591^761 and X25519.

https://www.openssh.com/txt/release-8.0

As far as I know elliptic curves at the same size as RSA are stronger both in a quantum and post-quantum setting.

True, in fact an elliptic key with 4096 bits would be way overkill. But there is also the issue of support.

Ed25519 and RSA3072 offer around 128 bits of entropy, which is kind of on margin even classically. RSA 4096 offers more protection against brute force, around 144 bits if I recall correctly. Of course, RSA is vulnerable to side channel attacks (though these nay not be in the threat model of many people).

You could use ed448 with 224 bits of security with still shorter keys than common RSA variants. But then it’s not supported in most places.

> which is kind of on margin even classically

Is it though? It requires around 2^128 operations to be broken. It does not seem very marginal to me.

It is not like AES where you have to deal with batch-attacks or cryptographic hash functions where collisions for a n-length output require only sqrt(2^n) attempts.

That’s not how it works!

That 128 bits is theoretical upper bound, not necessarily an achievable security rate. That’s the point of margin.

Very well, in that case, which symmetric encryption algorithm would you say has an acceptable security margin?

Is that because elliptic curve cryptography is more sensitive to quantum brute force in general, or is the key size of ed25519 the real factor?

And the only downside to RSA 4096 is that it will fall before Niederreiter using binary Goppa codes?

The upside of RSA is that we'll likely have evidence of ed25519 being breakable (~1500 qubits) before breaking RSA 4096 is possible (~8000 qubits). [https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/35137/how-many-qu...]

The number of usable qubits in a single computation is expensive and has been growing slowly and until that changes I figure it's more likely to be surprised by a break of ed25519 but not RSA 4096 than to be surprised by a break of both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com