View Single Post
  #36   Report Post  
Old September 26th 03, 06:11 AM
R. Steve Walz
 
Posts: n/a
Default

L'acrobat wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...

Thank you Admiral Doenitz...
------------
He's right. Major breaththrough of all possible barriers, the RSA
algorithm. Uncrackable in the lifetime of the serious user, and
crack is entirely predictable with improved computing power and
can be lengthened to compensate.

The fact that you and I think it is unbeatable, doesn't mean it is.

"lifetime of the serious user" what ********, you and I have

absolutely
no
idea what sort of tech/processing power will be available 10 years

from
now,
let alone 30.
-----------------
Nothing CAN magically guess extraordinarily long primes. That will
never just magically become possible. This intrinsic truth resides
in the very mathematics itself, a fact outside of time and progress,
and not in any technology of any kind.


"and crack is entirely predictable with improved computing power" of
course
it is...

Ask the good Admiral how confident he was that his system was

secure.
----------------------
Irrelevant. His system relied on technology, as any mathematician

could
have told him. He merely held his nose and trusted the allies weren't
technically advanced enough to do it quick enough. He lost.

But the "bet" that RSA makes is totally different, in that it relies
statistically upon the ABSOLUTE RANDOM unlikelihood of any absolute
guessing of very large prime numbers by machines whose rate of

guessing
is limited and well-known as their intrinsic limit. This number is a
VERY VERY VERY large prime number. In case you don't quite get it, the
most used high security prime number size is greater than the number
of atoms in the entire big-bang universe AND greater than even THAT
by an even GREATER multiplier! See the writings of James Bidzos, CEO

of
RSA Tech. for these revelations.


Damn near as confident as you are and that worked out so well,

didn't
it?
------------------------
You have absolutely NO IDEA what the **** you're talking about.


See Mr Schoenes response.

It seems that you sir, have no idea what the **** you are talking about.

-------------------
You're a lying **** and a bounder, and you're diddling yourself and
delaying the inevitable.


Not trying to argue your already discredited position anymore Stevie?

-----------------------
Ain't any such.


Only an idiot would suggest that any code is "Uncrackable in the lifetime of
the serious user" ands so you did.

---------------------------
It *IS*!
If you choose to try to crack RSA go to their site and download a
test message and try it. None have done so above the known prime
lengths that are do-able.


Again, ask the Good Admiral D how confident he was that his system was

safe.
----------------
You're blathering, hoping that line will sustain you while you try
to bluster your way out of this, when the fact is that RSA is
qualitatively different than any systematically crackable cipher.


As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable,

-------------------
Which we knew, but it takes for ****ing ever statistically.
It can easily be made to take longer than the current age of the
universe.


but you are.

--------------------
More of your meaningless blather and ridiculous self-covering.


What, exactly do you think the NSA is doing with all those 'puters they own?
playing Doom?

---------------------
Monitoring un-coded transmissions en masse hoping to flag trends
or conspiracies by other characteristic signatures.

But as for cracking RSA encoded messages or even kiddy porn being
sent encoded from Europe: Not a whole ****ing hell of a lot anymore.
They are hoping their hardware will frighten terrorists out of using
commonly available public domain technology to completely defeat them,
while knowing that everyone who knows anything knows they are totally
defeated by any kid with a computer if he bothers to look it up and
download the tools and use a long enough bit-length and a decent
firewall properly installed.


Of course RSA is uncrackable, just like the good Admirals systems
and I
assume he had a lackwitted buffoon just like you telling him that there was
no way anyone could be decrypting our stuff too...

---------------------------
That's irrelevant, because he would have simply been technically
wrong out of his own ignorance of cryptology, whereas I am not.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public