What is one of the advantages of using both symmetric and asymmetric cryptography in SSL/TLS?

Question

Options

• ASymmetric algorithms such as AES provide a failsafe when asymmetric methods fail.
• BAsymmetric cryptography is computationally expensive in comparison. However, it is well-suited
• CSymmetric encryption allows the server to securely transmit the session keys out-of-band.
• DSupporting both types of algorithms allows less-powerful devices such as mobile phones to use

• A
  3% (1)
• B
  95% (35)
• C
  3% (1)

Explanation

SSL/TLS: Symmetric + Asymmetric Cryptography

Option B is correct because SSL/TLS uses asymmetric cryptography (e.g., RSA or ECDH) during the initial handshake to securely exchange or establish a shared secret, then switches to symmetric cryptography (e.g., AES) for the bulk of data transmission - giving you the security benefits of asymmetric encryption without its high computational cost throughout the session.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is incorrect because symmetric algorithms are not a "failsafe" for asymmetric failure - they serve entirely different roles in the protocol
• C is incorrect because session keys are exchanged in-band (within the TLS handshake itself), not out-of-band
• D is incomplete/misleading - while mobile devices do benefit from efficient symmetric encryption, this is a side effect, not the primary architectural advantage of combining both types

Memory Tip: Think of it like a locked mailbox: asymmetric crypto is the padlock (secure but heavy to carry everywhere), while symmetric crypto is the house key (fast and efficient for daily use). TLS uses the padlock once to safely hand over the house key.

No community discussion yet for this question.