RSA vs DSA

[nega at exmachinae.net]

Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
 > On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 01:36:43AM -0500, Kris Maglione wrote:
 > > So, what about "(b) RSA is just a better protocol [(algorighm)]"?
 > > I've read a few pieces which recommend RSA over DSA, although most 
 > > crypto programs (OpenSSL/SSH etc.) say RSA is depricated/a last resort. 
 > > Any insights?
 > 
 > The OpenSSL and OpenSSH guys are right. DSA is stronger than RSA, as
 > long as it is done correctly. But since it is harder to implement DSA
 > correctly, a lot of fools might suggest avoiding it :)
 > 
 > Joerg

When considering the "strength" of an algorithm, take in to acount
that DSA was never intended for encryption and was selected by a
standards body (NIST) under less than "open competition".

A decent FAQ with some good refrences in it can be found at
http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2239

Summary of the FAQ: DSA is as secure as anyother "unbroken" signature
algorithm. DSA is faster at key generation and signing. RSA is faster
at verification. So, consider your application when choosing the
algorithm.