Post B4uHWqG4mLo91JRXKi by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
 (DIR) More posts by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
 (DIR) Post #B4tJd7GwRKNwHA0XKa by soatok@furry.engineer
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Jeez, what a mess.https://www.404media.co/a-secure-chat-apps-encryption-is-so-bad-it-is-meaningless/
       
 (DIR) Post #B4tJd7SHl9SWqLJb0q by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @soatok _uploadRSAPrivateKey(), woooooooo
       
 (DIR) Post #B4uHWqG4mLo91JRXKi by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @soatok @stiiin no. RSA is fine as long as the modulus is sufficient.the QC advances are overstated: if you read the paper, they chose intentionally weak key parameters to factor, and in any case the modulus was only 22 bits.this isn't to say that tasteful elliptic curve cryptography (like curve25519) is bad, just that there really isn't any urgency to move away from RSA in systems which use it.its still a valid choice, as long as there is a sufficiently large modulus.  keys with 4096 or 8192 bit modulus are totally fine for the forseeable future for example, bar some major advancement in quantum computing.but I don't see it happening this decade.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4uLPt4oIlqzYC749w by charlotte@akko.chir.rs
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ariadne @soatok @stiiin yeah but this isn’t a legacy protocol and a CRQC will break ecc all the same
       
 (DIR) Post #B4uLPtMBGBkSQ4EwEa by ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @soatok @stiiin @charlotte sure, they made mistakes.  lots of them in fact.  I just don't consider using RSA to be a concern here.