RSA uses the so-called integer factorization problem, a problem in mathematics which states that, while it is easy to multiply two huge prime numbers, factoring the resulting composite number back into the original two prime numbers is very, very hard.
The reason for this is that attacking RSA is not done using brute force, but by attempting to factor a very large composite number. RSA 2048 is approximately equivalent to a 112-bit key. If on the other hand you are referring to any type of cryptoanalytic attack, the answer is that the WPA2 Enterprise option using RSA 2048 provides less security. For a 63-character random passphrase, the entire 2 128 keyspace of the session key is used. * Regardless of how it is generated, the session key will have a keyspace of up to 2 128. For WPA2 Personal using a passphrase of any length, a 128-bit key is derived from the passphrase itself using a key-strengthening algorithm called PBKDF2. When using WPA2 Enterprise, a random 128-bit key is generated and exchanged using public key cryptography. The reason for this is that the only difference between the two is how the key is derived. Ignoring the benefits and drawbacks of each protocol and focusing exclusively on the difficulty of a brute force attack, the answer is that they are both identical.
0 kommentar(er)
