Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:55:53 GMT, 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. Maybe. And maybe QC will make possible other encryption techniques. 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). All good cryptosystems are still effective if the adversary knows the algorithm. The most effective attacks aren't usually on the systems, but on the people -- e.g. getting an insider to divulge secrets. -- "It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:55:53 GMT, 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. Maybe. And maybe QC will make possible other encryption techniques. 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). All good cryptosystems are still effective if the adversary knows the algorithm. The most effective attacks aren't usually on the systems, but on the people -- e.g. getting an insider to divulge secrets. -- "It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Fred Abse wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) ------------------------ We're talking life of the universe now using more computers than the number of atoms in the big bang! -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 |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Fred Abse wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) ------------------------ We're talking life of the universe now using more computers than the number of atoms in the big bang! -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 |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred Abse" wrote in message newsan.2003.09.26.18.56.35.507185.669@cerebrumco nfus.it... On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) and Govts have a little more money and slightly better machines for the task. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred Abse" wrote in message newsan.2003.09.26.18.56.35.507185.669@cerebrumco nfus.it... On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) and Govts have a little more money and slightly better machines for the task. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... 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. We aren't discussing ME doing it you cretin. We are discussing a Govt doing it. 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. That is what you believe. you are wrong. everyone always thinks their codes are safe right up to the point that they are not safe. but you are. -------------------- More of your meaningless blather and ridiculous self-covering. Yawn. 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 they are, they have eleventy squillion bucks worth of supercomputers, all of which is just to 'frighten'. 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. Anyone stupid enough to believe their crypto is uncrackable is utterly ignorant and a dangerous fool to boot. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... 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. We aren't discussing ME doing it you cretin. We are discussing a Govt doing it. 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. That is what you believe. you are wrong. everyone always thinks their codes are safe right up to the point that they are not safe. but you are. -------------------- More of your meaningless blather and ridiculous self-covering. Yawn. 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 they are, they have eleventy squillion bucks worth of supercomputers, all of which is just to 'frighten'. 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. Anyone stupid enough to believe their crypto is uncrackable is utterly ignorant and a dangerous fool to boot. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
L'acrobat wrote:
"Fred Abse" wrote in message newsan.2003.09.26.18.56.35.507185.669@cerebrumco nfus.it... On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) and Govts have a little more money and slightly better machines for the task. ------------------ BUT NOT a billion trillion times more, which is just about right. (~10^22) -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 |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
L'acrobat wrote:
"Fred Abse" wrote in message newsan.2003.09.26.18.56.35.507185.669@cerebrumco nfus.it... On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 05:55:38 +0100, L'acrobat wrote: As has already been shown, RSA isn't uncrackable It was cracked by brute force but only on a 64-bit key. That was done by literally thousands of machines around the world, collaborating, using spare processor time (mine was one). 331,252 individuals participated (some were using multiple machines). 15,769,938,165,961,326,592 keys were tested It took 1757 days. Some guy in Japan is one happy bunny. He got the ten thousand buck prize from RSA Labs for the correct key. 2048 bit keys are a little more difficult :-) and Govts have a little more money and slightly better machines for the task. ------------------ BUT NOT a billion trillion times more, which is just about right. (~10^22) -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 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1419  October 22, 2004 | Dx | |||
F6FBB to Internet email? | Digital | |||
F6FBB to Internet email? | Digital | |||
Internet trials and the European EMC directive | Equipment | |||
Internet trials and the European EMC directive | Equipment |