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
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
'BootHole' Vulnerability Exposes Secure Boot Devices to Attack
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/29/2020
Average Cost of a Data Breach: $3.86 Million
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  7/29/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-13151
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
Aerospike Community Edition 4.9.0.5 allows for unauthenticated submission and execution of user-defined functions (UDFs), written in Lua, as part of a database query. It attempts to restrict code execution by disabling os.execute() calls, but this is insufficient. Anyone with network access can use ...
CVE-2017-18112
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
Affected versions of Atlassian Fisheye allow remote attackers to view the HTTP password of a repository via an Information Disclosure vulnerability in the logging feature. The affected versions are before version 4.8.3.
CVE-2020-15109
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
In solidus before versions 2.8.6, 2.9.6, and 2.10.2, there is an bility to change order address without triggering address validations. This vulnerability allows a malicious customer to craft request data with parameters that allow changing the address of the current order without changing the shipm...
CVE-2020-16847
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
Extreme Analytics in Extreme Management Center before 8.5.0.169 allows unauthenticated reflected XSS via a parameter in a GET request, aka CFD-4887.
CVE-2020-15135
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
save-server (npm package) before version 1.05 is affected by a CSRF vulnerability, as there is no CSRF mitigation (Tokens etc.). The fix introduced in version version 1.05 unintentionally breaks uploading so version v1.0.7 is the fixed version. This is patched by implementing Double submit. The CSRF...