3 ms·
Ok then break all cryptography with that. It just proves my point you can SAY you can do it but in practice you can’t.
by test77777 3y ago
Ok then break all cryptography with that. It just proves my point you can SAY you can do it but in practice you can’t.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y agoCryptography is about finding large prime factors of a large number. That's a much harder problem than just determining whether a specific number is prime or not.
- test77777 3y agoI don’t understand you just say it was about finding factors, okay yeah that determines whether a number is prime. You’re not telling me anything I don’t know, I just disagree with your stance.
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agoprimality checking is much easier that factoring. it's somewhat unintuitive, but there are deterministic methods of primality testing that don't tell you the factors.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y agoI don't understand your stance. You seem to be claiming that the ability to determine whether a number is prime or not is extremely difficult and that it would break (some) cryptography if it were no so. My stance is that (some) cryptography would not be broken unless factorisation of large numbers into two large primes becomes easy. Can you clarify how you think that some cryptography is broken by a relatively simple test of whether a large number is prime or not?
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agoprime testing is much easier than factoring. you need to factor to break rsa
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Ar-Curunir 3y agoSome cryptography depends on hardness of factoring, not hardness of checking primality.
- eigenket 3y agoAKS is an example of a deterministic algorithm which works out whether a number is prime or composite and runs in polynomial time in the number of bits in the number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKS_primality_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKS_primality_test I'm not sure why you would expect this to break all (or any) cryptographic protocols.
- bigbillheck 3y agoHow would that work?