ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?

2006-03-17 17:40:37

On Mar 17, 2006, at 8:48 AM, Russ Housley wrote:

Security AD Advice

512-bit RSA keys are too short. They may be acceptable when the crypto period is very short (say a week). I cannot envision most administrators accepting the management burden associated with such short crypto periods.

Proposed text:
Since short RSA keys are susceptible [to] off-line attacks, signers MUST use RSA keys of at least 1024 bits for long-lived keys. Receivers MUST be able to validate signatures with keys ranging from 512 bits to 2048 bits, and they MAY be able to validate signatures with larger keys. Security policies may use the length of the signing key as one metric for determining whether a signature is acceptable.

With respect to 2048 bit keys, there is already a placeholder in the base draft for developing a much needed binary DKIM key. There was a concern raised about utilizing the RFC2538 CERT #37 RR for this purpose. I have assurances Paul Vixie will assist an effort by the DKIM WG to utilize the CERT RR for the binary version of the DKIM key.

-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html