Talk:RSA/to do


 * A rigorous and correct treatment of padding is essential for this article to avoid being misleading.
 * In the paragraph "Security", I think the figure 1999 must be reviewed.
 * It should be reviewed whether a 256 bit key can be factored in hours on a personal computer. I can factor them in minutes on my (somewhat old) machine.
 * At least one illustration of RSA (as noted here)
 * It is given two competing proofs of correctness, wich is very non-encyclopedic; remove the "simple" one, which (as noted) does not hold for all x, and improve the other.
 * Typographically, the article suffers from non-homogeneous layout of formula (HTML intermixed with Tex)