RSA, and to a similar extent Diffie-Hellman, base their security on the difficulty in factoring primes. While a scheme like AES can use all 2ⁿ numbers, in order to break RSA, you need to guess prime numbers.

As there are far fewer prime numbers and the factors can be better guessed, we need far larger prime numbers than other schemes like AES. So each additional bit doesn't double the difficulty of brute forcing it. If you wanna venture into the math, you can check out the Wikipedia page on RSA.

While no one (we know of) has managed to break 1024, it is always important to stay ahead of the curve. And since brute force isn't exactly 2²⁵⁶ times more difficult,we pick higher primes. Who knows what future improvements in mathematics could break 1024-bit keys.

RSA, and to a somewhat similar extent Diffie-Hellman, bases its security on the difficulty of factoring large numbers into primes. While a scheme like AES can use all 2ⁿ numbers, in order to break RSA, you need to guess prime numbers.

As there are far fewer prime numbers and the factors can be better guessed, we need far larger prime numbers than other schemes like AES. So each additional bit doesn't double the difficulty of brute forcing it. If you want to venture into the math, you can check out the Wikipedia page on RSA.

While no one (we know of) has managed to break 1024, it is always important to stay ahead of the curve. And since brute force isn't exactly 2²⁵⁶ times more difficult,we pick higher primes. Who knows what future improvements in mathematics could break 1024-bit keys.

With RSA, and to a similar extend Diffie-Hellman, base their security on the difficulty in factoring primes. While a scheme like AES can use all 2^n numbers, in order to break RSA, you need to guess prime numbers.

As there are far fewer prime numbers and the factors can be better guessed, we need far larger prime numbers than other schemes like AES. So each bit doesn't add 2x the difficulty of brute forcing it. If you wanna venture into the math, you can check out the wikipedia page on RSA.

While no one (we know of) has managed to break 1024, it is always important to stay ahead of the curve. And since brute force isn't exactly 2^256x more difficult,we pick higher primes. Who knows what future improvements in mathematics could break 1024 bit keys.

RSA, and to a similar extent Diffie-Hellman, base their security on the difficulty in factoring primes. While a scheme like AES can use all 2ⁿ numbers, in order to break RSA, you need to guess prime numbers.

As there are far fewer prime numbers and the factors can be better guessed, we need far larger prime numbers than other schemes like AES. So each additional bit doesn't double the difficulty of brute forcing it. If you wanna venture into the math, you can check out the Wikipedia page on RSA.

While no one (we know of) has managed to break 1024, it is always important to stay ahead of the curve. And since brute force isn't exactly 2²⁵⁶ times more difficult,we pick higher primes. Who knows what future improvements in mathematics could break 1024-bit keys.