Regardless of the parent's statement, just normal compute in 30 years, plus general vulnerabilities and weaknesses discovered, will ensure that anything encrypted today is easily readable in the future.
I can't think of anything from 30 years ago that isn't just a joke today. The same will likely be true by 2050, quantum computing or not. I wonder how many people realise this?
Even if one disagrees with my certainty, I think people should still plan for the concept that there's a strong probability it will be so. Encryption is really not about preventing data exposure, but about delaying it.
Any other view regarding encryption means disappointment.
> I can't think of anything from 30 years ago that isn't just a joke today.
AES is only 3 years shy of 30.
If you used MD5 as a keystream generator I believe that would still be secure and that's 33 years old.
3DES is still pretty secure, isn't it? That's 44 years old.
As for today's data, there's always risk into the future but we've gotten better as making secure algorithms over time and avoiding quantum attacks seems to mostly be a matter of doubling key length. I'd worry more about plain old leaks.
You are underestimating the exponential possibilities of keys.
>plus general vulnerabilities and weaknesses discovered, will ensure that anything encrypted today is easily readable in the future.
You can't just assume that there is always going to be new vulnerabilities that cause it to be broken. It ignores that people have improved at designing secure cryptography over time.
> I can't think of anything from 30 years ago that isn't just a joke today
The gold standard 30 years ago was PGP. RSA 1024 or 2048 for key exchange. IDEA symmetric cipher.
This combination is, as far as I am aware, still practically cryptographically secure. Though maybe not in another 10 or 20 years. (RSA 1024 is not that far from brute forcing with classical machines.)
NewsaHackO|8 months ago
b112|8 months ago
I can't think of anything from 30 years ago that isn't just a joke today. The same will likely be true by 2050, quantum computing or not. I wonder how many people realise this?
Even if one disagrees with my certainty, I think people should still plan for the concept that there's a strong probability it will be so. Encryption is really not about preventing data exposure, but about delaying it.
Any other view regarding encryption means disappointment.
Dylan16807|8 months ago
AES is only 3 years shy of 30.
If you used MD5 as a keystream generator I believe that would still be secure and that's 33 years old.
3DES is still pretty secure, isn't it? That's 44 years old.
As for today's data, there's always risk into the future but we've gotten better as making secure algorithms over time and avoiding quantum attacks seems to mostly be a matter of doubling key length. I'd worry more about plain old leaks.
charcircuit|8 months ago
You are underestimating the exponential possibilities of keys.
>plus general vulnerabilities and weaknesses discovered, will ensure that anything encrypted today is easily readable in the future.
You can't just assume that there is always going to be new vulnerabilities that cause it to be broken. It ignores that people have improved at designing secure cryptography over time.
retrac|8 months ago
The gold standard 30 years ago was PGP. RSA 1024 or 2048 for key exchange. IDEA symmetric cipher.
This combination is, as far as I am aware, still practically cryptographically secure. Though maybe not in another 10 or 20 years. (RSA 1024 is not that far from brute forcing with classical machines.)