3 ms·
As I posted to the other thread: Somewhat disappointing, but not surprising that they did not describe their actual calculation technique for finding the conne
by nohat 15y ago
As I posted to the other thread:
Somewhat disappointing, but not surprising that they did not describe their actual calculation technique for finding the connected primes. It strikes me that there isn't a good excuse for having bad random numbers with the computation power we now have. A simple bitwise addition of various sources of supposedly random numbers is strictly stronger than any subset of its components. So we can combine lots of questionable strong sources and get a very strong source.
Generating the primes locally with insufficient independence seems more understandable than that the same primes are used by independent parties. That hints at a more severe problem with random number generation. Regardless, assuming this is confirmed, it is a significant problem that needs to be hunted down.
- jalapeno_dude 15y agoThey didn't describe the technique, but the fact that the paper has the keyword "Euclidean algorithm" makes it pretty obvious--they just gathered a list of public keys, took the gcd of all the pairs, and whenever they found a gcd not equal to one, they'd cracked both keys out of that particular pair. See my earlier comment.
- nohat 15y agoI took the 'the straightforward approach would require about ten core-years and would not scale well' to mean they had a more efficient method.