Prev: Current state of affairs in cryptanalysis: an observation
Next: Hashing of short fixed length messages
From: JSH on 13 Jun 2010 14:48
On Jun 13, 11:45 am, Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> wrote:
> On 13/06/2010 19:19, JSH wrote:
>
> > I'm not stupid enough to fully implement this thing.
>
> No. You don't have the necessary skill to do so.
>
> >> Do some timing tests with a range of values and compare them with the
> >> equivalent timings for simple brute force.  Come back to us with the
> >> results and we can discuss them.
>
> >> rossum
>
> > Why don't you try that and see how long you live out in the open?
>
> How dead the the folks who made the DES cracker end up?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFF_DES_cracker
>
> Cryptologists find attacks on ciphers all the time. They are perfectly
> safe.
>
> You really ought to do some research sometime.

Thanks to you mentioning modular exponentiation I realized there could
be a bigger breach.

So those relations it seems may simply end all of the current main
encryption techniques.

Which could mean that NSA communiques around the world could be as bad
as plaintext.

Which is kind of weird.

In any event, do my suggestion! Prove yourself right! Try to exploit
what I've found and please, post very publicly about it.

Prove me wrong.


James Harris
From: Mark Murray on 13 Jun 2010 15:11
On 13/06/2010 19:48, JSH wrote:
> In any event, do my suggestion! Prove yourself right! Try to exploit
> what I've found and please, post very publicly about it.

There is nothing to gain in attempting a futile exercise.

Your method won't work, and me posting non-working "results" would
be pointless.

Others have posted demstrations that brute force, PRNG sequences and
the digits of Pi are all equally effective in battering an answer out
your method for simple examples. Even you have agreed that real-world
examples are unfeasable.

M
--
Mark "No Nickname" Murray
Notable nebbish, extreme generalist.
From: JSH on 13 Jun 2010 15:54
On Jun 13, 12:11 pm, Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> wrote:
> On 13/06/2010 19:48, JSH wrote:
>
> > In any event, do my suggestion!  Prove yourself right!  Try to exploit
> > what I've found and please, post very publicly about it.
>
> There is nothing to gain in attempting a futile exercise.
>
> Your method won't work, and me posting non-working "results" would
> be pointless.
>
> Others have posted demstrations that brute force, PRNG sequences and
> the digits of Pi are all equally effective in battering an answer out
> your method for simple examples. Even you have agreed that real-world
> examples are unfeasable.

No, they haven't. You're lying again.

I've posted output from a test program. Here's a copy of some of that
output that I put on sci.math:

The program is finding k, such that k^2 = 24025 mod 32033. I found
24025 by squaring floor(32033/2), and taking its residue mod 32033.

java QuadRes 24025 32033

k=155

155^2 = 24025 mod 32033

a_1=1, a_2=2

f_1=155, f_2=310

T = 48050

48050 mod 32033 = 16017

Total number of T's used: 3
Total number of factorizations: 11

Individual factors known by program of T that worked:
( 2 )( 5^2 )( 31^2 )

Now then, what is the gcd between 16016 - 155 and 32033?

It's

From: Mark Murray on 13 Jun 2010 17:06
On 13/06/2010 20:54, JSH wrote:
>> Others have posted demstrations that brute force, PRNG sequences and
>> the digits of Pi are all equally effective in battering an answer out
>> your method for simple examples. Even you have agreed that real-world
>> examples are unfeasable.
>
> No, they haven't. You're lying again.

http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=7093353&tstart=0

> I've posted output from a test program. Here's a copy of some of that
> output that I put on sci.math:

I have a copy of the source of that program. It solves a subset of the
problem by brute force.

M
--
Mark "No Nickname" Murray
Notable nebbish, extreme generalist.
From: starwars on 13 Jun 2010 17:34
Please do not:
respond to JSH posts
respond to google groups posts

Thereby you:
keep the internet and this newsgroup free of noise
do not encourage lunatics to continue posting lunacy

Thank you!

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Current state of affairs in cryptanalysis: an observation
Next: Hashing of short fixed length messages