Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Perimeter

2/11/2010
03:48 AM
Gadi Evron
Gadi Evron
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

How Much Crypto You Really Need

Last month an international team of researchers announced they had managed to factor a 768-bit RSA key. This raises interesting questions about handling encryption and planning ahead in your security strategy.

Last month an international team of researchers announced they had managed to factor a 768-bit RSA key. This raises interesting questions about handling encryption and planning ahead in your security strategy.I am not a cryptographer and therefore not an authority on the RSA algorithm. However, I would like to discuss the strategic use of encryption and how that impacts our decision on choosing and implementing an encryption scheme.

In the introduction to their paper (PDF), the researchers wrote:

Because the first factorization of a 512-bit RSA modulus was reported only a decade ago (cf. [7]) it is not unreasonable to expect that 1024-bit RSA moduli can be factored well within the next decade by an academic effort such as ours or the one in [7]. Thus, it would be prudent to phase out usage of 1024-bit RSA within the next three to four years.
The researchers make it clear that this is not an immediate threat, and while the use of larger keys should be phased in, there are no immediate security ramifications.

When choosing an encryption algorithm, you must first ask yourself what your purpose is -- in other words, conduct a risk analysis. What do you want to protect? How important is it? How vulnerable is it? What is the threat? Who is the threat?

If your biggest risk is your neighbor, then you can feel relatively secure using off-the-shelf encryption without worrying about too many details.

However, even if you are not a nation-state with an opponent that will invest unlimited resources to get your information, there are three main questions you should ask:

1. How long into the future would I like this information to remain secret? Based on this answer you can consult with an industry analyst as to projected computer power changes in the coming years. Any foreseeable breakthroughs in the math that could reduce the time needed to break the encryption. Then based on two factors, make the call: How paranoid do you feel you need to be according to your risk assessment, judged against the functionality you require and implementation costs?

2. Does my opponent have the resources to deal with this encryption? To break modern encryption on a PC could take longer than the life of the universe. Don't be confused by this statement: Consider what else your opponent might be willing to do to get your information. Encryption makes us feel safer, but it does not equate security.

As an alternative, also consider that encryption is a secret, and you might want to use several encryption schemes so as to not make one too secure to work with; you won't be able to trust people who run your daily operations to use it.

3. Because the algorithm is rarely the weakest link in real-world attacks, have I taken care of the implementation? Most attacks against encryption systems are against the implementation rather than the algorithm -- be it the programming, which should be done and reviewed by experts, or the procedures by which the encryption is put to use.

Further, side-channel attacks ranging from the less likely, such as TEMPEST (electromagnetic emanations) to Trojan horses (which are a significant threat), and from stolen laptops to buying off an employee, must not be left to chance. These should all be considered and planned for. The algorithm alone does not make you safe.

Follow Gadi Evron on Twitter: http://twitter.com/gadievron.

Gadi Evron is an independent security strategist based in Israel. Special to Dark Reading. Gadi is CEO and founder of Cymmetria, a cyber deception startup and chairman of the Israeli CERT. Previously, he was vice president of cybersecurity strategy for Kaspersky Lab and led PwC's Cyber Security Center of Excellence, located in Israel. He is widely recognized for ... View Full Bio

 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.