Re: speaking of keys

[Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>]

>You only get about 80 bits of strength from a 1024-bit DH group.  That
>seems insufficient for reasonable paranoids.
>
>Hilarie

Now I am really puzzled, given the recent messages from David Wagner 
in which 160 bits of entropy was accorded to 1024-bit DH:

>"This objection has already been addressed on the list.  Those 1024
>bits of Diffie-Hellman only have 160 bits of strength (160 bits of
>"computational entropy"), hence you're not reducing security by hashing
>it down to 160 bits.
>
>Indeed, in some sense you are improving security by hashing the 1024-bit
>Diffie-Hellman result down to a 160-bit security, just as Hugo's earlier
>note pointed out.  Can I encourage you to re-read Hugo's earlier emails
>on this topic?  I hope you will find them persuasive.  (I certainly did.)"


What gives?

Steve