|
L'acrobat wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "phil hunt" wrote in message . .. transmissions still very clear), and the use of FH combined with crypto key makes it darned near impossible for the bad guy to decypher it in any realistic timely manner. Modern crypto is good enough to withstand all cryptanalytic attacks. 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. -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 |
L'acrobat wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "phil hunt" wrote in message . .. transmissions still very clear), and the use of FH combined with crypto key makes it darned near impossible for the bad guy to decypher it in any realistic timely manner. Modern crypto is good enough to withstand all cryptanalytic attacks. 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. -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 |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
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. That's true now, but only to a point. That point is the advent of quantum computing, which allows you to effectively solve for all the possible factors in very little time (say 10^500 times faster than conventional computing for this sort of problem). If QC happens, large prime number encryption is crackable in a matter of seconds. And there is at least some reason to beleive that QC is achievable within a couple of decades. OTOH, the real danger in the near- to mid-term is not crypto-system attack, but physical compromise of the crypto-system (the adversary getting hold of the both the mechanism and the keys themselves). If they have the actual keys, the eavesdroppers can decode RSA just as easily as the intended recipients. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
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. That's true now, but only to a point. That point is the advent of quantum computing, which allows you to effectively solve for all the possible factors in very little time (say 10^500 times faster than conventional computing for this sort of problem). If QC happens, large prime number encryption is crackable in a matter of seconds. And there is at least some reason to beleive that QC is achievable within a couple of decades. OTOH, the real danger in the near- to mid-term is not crypto-system attack, but physical compromise of the crypto-system (the adversary getting hold of the both the mechanism and the keys themselves). If they have the actual keys, the eavesdroppers can decode RSA just as easily as the intended recipients. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
"phil hunt" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:47:07 +1000, L'acrobat wrote: "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, Ever heard of Moore's law? I've got a pretty good idea. A typical PC now has a 2 GHz CPU, and about 256 MB RAM. Assume these double every 18 months. 10 years is about 7 doublings so in 2003 we'll see PCs with 250 GHz CPUs and 32 GB of RAM. Right. you are going to base national security matter on a rule of thumb that relates to a typical PC. Good move. |
"phil hunt" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:47:07 +1000, L'acrobat wrote: "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, Ever heard of Moore's law? I've got a pretty good idea. A typical PC now has a 2 GHz CPU, and about 256 MB RAM. Assume these double every 18 months. 10 years is about 7 doublings so in 2003 we'll see PCs with 250 GHz CPUs and 32 GB of RAM. Right. you are going to base national security matter on a rule of thumb that relates to a typical PC. Good move. |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "phil hunt" wrote in message . .. transmissions still very clear), and the use of FH combined with crypto key makes it darned near impossible for the bad guy to decypher it in any realistic timely manner. Modern crypto is good enough to withstand all cryptanalytic attacks. 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. Again, ask the Good Admiral D how confident he was that his system was safe. |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: "phil hunt" wrote in message . .. transmissions still very clear), and the use of FH combined with crypto key makes it darned near impossible for the bad guy to decypher it in any realistic timely manner. Modern crypto is good enough to withstand all cryptanalytic attacks. 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. Again, ask the Good Admiral D how confident he was that his system was safe. |
Thomas Schoene wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message 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. That's true now, but only to a point. That point is the advent of quantum computing, which allows you to effectively solve for all the possible factors in very little time (say 10^500 times faster than conventional computing for this sort of problem). If QC happens, large prime number encryption is crackable in a matter of seconds. And there is at least some reason to beleive that QC is achievable within a couple of decades. ----------------------- Or DNA computing, sure. Just an escalation, the power of operations easier one way than the other persists and an increase in length results in the same safety. For it to be otherwise you need to postulate that the govt will be doing its own fundamental research, and it NEVER does, and that it will develop QC to that level BEFORE the market sells it or the people developing it steal it and spread it around to prevent a national monopoly on power, and that's pretty unlikely. OTOH, the real danger in the near- to mid-term is not crypto-system attack, but physical compromise of the crypto-system (the adversary getting hold of the both the mechanism and the keys themselves). If they have the actual keys, the eavesdroppers can decode RSA just as easily as the intended recipients. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) --------------------- Yes. Goes without saying. -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 |
Thomas Schoene wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message 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. That's true now, but only to a point. That point is the advent of quantum computing, which allows you to effectively solve for all the possible factors in very little time (say 10^500 times faster than conventional computing for this sort of problem). If QC happens, large prime number encryption is crackable in a matter of seconds. And there is at least some reason to beleive that QC is achievable within a couple of decades. ----------------------- Or DNA computing, sure. Just an escalation, the power of operations easier one way than the other persists and an increase in length results in the same safety. For it to be otherwise you need to postulate that the govt will be doing its own fundamental research, and it NEVER does, and that it will develop QC to that level BEFORE the market sells it or the people developing it steal it and spread it around to prevent a national monopoly on power, and that's pretty unlikely. OTOH, the real danger in the near- to mid-term is not crypto-system attack, but physical compromise of the crypto-system (the adversary getting hold of the both the mechanism and the keys themselves). If they have the actual keys, the eavesdroppers can decode RSA just as easily as the intended recipients. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) --------------------- Yes. Goes without saying. -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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com