Highlights:
- They factored the number RSA-768 on December 12th, 2009
- The number RSA-768 is from the RSA Challenge list as a representative 768-bit RSA modulus
- This result sets a new record for factoring general integers
- Math: Method used is the number field sieve factoring method
- Quoted from the paper: "We spent half a year on 80 processors on polynomial selection. This was about 3% of the main task, the sieving, which was done on many hundreds of machines and took almost two years."
"What does it mean when a Challenge Number is factored?
Users of the RSA public-key cryptosystem may wonder what the factoring of a challenge number implies about the security of their keys. Should they immediately replace their keys with larger ones? Should they stop using RSA altogether?
Clearly, the factoring of a challenge-number of specific length does not mean that the RSA cryptosystem is "broken." It does not even mean, necessarily, that keys of the same length as the factored challenge number must be discarded. It simply gives us an idea of the amount of work required to factor a modulus of a given size. This can be translated into an estimate of the cost of breaking a particular RSA key pair.
Suppose, for example, that in the year 2010 a factorization of RSA-768 is announced that requires 6 months of effort on 100,000 workstations. In this hypothetical situation, would all 768-bit RSA keys need to be replaced? The answer is no. If the data being protected needs security for significantly less than six months, and its value is considerably less than the cost of running 100,000 workstations for that period, then 768-bit keys may continue to be used.
Applications that require longer-term security or have data with a high financial value should migrate to longer keys before the factoring of the corresponding challenge number is announced. In either case, the results of the Factoring Challenge provide real data to help the cryptosystem user choose the appropriate key size"
Authors of the paper:
Thorsten Kleinjung; Kazumaro Aoki; Jens Franke; Arjen Lenstra; Emmanuel Thomé; Joppe Bos; Pierrick Gaudry; Alexander Kruppa; Peter Montgomery; Dag Arne Osvik; Herman te Riele; Andrey Timofeev and Paul Zimmermann









Leave a comment
Click here for recent comments.
(Note: You must have javascript enabled to leave comments, otherwise you will get a comment submission error.)