[108099] in Cypherpunks
Re: Does anybody still have Dr. Revest's analysis?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jean-Francois Avon)
Thu Feb 4 15:54:28 1999
From: "Jean-Francois Avon" <jf_avon@citenet.net>
To: <Nilsphone@aol.com>
Cc: <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 15:26:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Jean-Francois Avon" <jf_avon@citenet.net>
>Somebody, I think it was Dr. Reveste (the "R" in RSA) did a thourough
analysis
I think I remember reading it in a previous lifetime... :-) The
swiss-cheese that occupies my cranial box tend to have moving holes that
wipe whatever content used to be coded within the bulk of the cheese...
Must be a melting / re-solidification process that randomize any organized
structure... But I can't tell exactly for I did not study neurology. (Note
that my modelization is, although very satisfying at the predictive level,
at best a wild guess...)
>3) New and better algorithms
>4) Actual frontal cryptanalysis attacks, brute force with existing
algorithms
>5) Esoteric technologies such as quantum computers
I was wondering if from the presented achievement, one could not forecast
spinoffs in the other areas that you mentionned above. It seems that the
resolution of the problem is dependant on a given set of polynomial
coefficients, some set of "magic numbers". There _must_ be some rationale
behind the picking of such coefficients, therefore it seems to imply that
not only computational performance is involved, but also theoretical
advances. RSA will probably stand pretty well against technological
advances since, as you mentionned, the complexity of the cracking goes
exponentialy with with the lenght of the key. But that is assuming the same
theoretical tools for cracking are used. What worries me more is the
theoretical advances...
Ciao
jfa
