Re: septillion operations per second
If they ever build such a computer (or 1.000.000 of them) what would that mean for today's key lengths ? I am curious how long a computer capable of a septillion operations per second would take to crack one 128 bit or 256 bit key. Or a RSA 1024 or 2048 bit key for that matter ... take a peek at the chapter on key lengths in Schneier's Applied Cryptography. it is an entertaining read. in short, he makes the case that computers as we understand them simply cannot conduct brute force attacks against 128-bit or larger semetric keys. (i won't repeat his explanation here.) RSA keys are a bit dodgier. new techniques for prime number factoring could conceivably weaken keys that are considered strong today. having said all that, there are often weaknesses other than key length: predicting the key generation, keystroke monitoring, bribing your system administrator, etc. --mkb - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: septillion operations per second
At 12:16 PM +0200 6/20/2001, Barry Wels wrote: Hi, In James Bamford's new book 'Body of Secrets' he claims the NSA is working on some FAST computers. http://www.randomhouse.com/features/bamford/book.html --- The secret community is also home to the largest collection of hyper-powerful computers, advanced mathematicians and skilled language experts on the planet. Within the city, time is measured in femtosecondsone million billionth of a second, and scientists work in secret to develop computers capable of performing more than one septillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) operations every second. --- If they ever build such a computer (or 1.000.000 of them) what would that mean for today's key lengths ? I am curious how long a computer capable of a septillion operations per second would take to crack one 128 bit or 256 bit key. Or a RSA 1024 or 2048 bit key for that matter ... One septillion = 10**24 or about 2**80. If you assume 1000 operations to test a key, a septillion ops per second machine tests about 2**70 keys per second. For a 128 bit key, that means you need about 2**57 seconds on average to find a key, or about 4.6 billion years, the age of the Earth. A million of them (not likely) would do the job in only 4600 years. Arnold Reinhold - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: septillion operations per second
At 12:16 PM 6/20/01 +0200, Barry Wels wrote: Hi, In James Bamford's new book 'Body of Secrets' he claims the NSA is working on some FAST computers. http://www.randomhouse.com/features/bamford/book.html Fantastic book. I read the stuff about using Areceibo for moon-bounce surveillance of Soviet radars just after getting back from visiting the dish [1]. Re: fast computers. All crypto thinkers will assume that the Adversary has got each fundamental particle in the universe cranking away at insane speeds on your key until the Restaurant at the End of the Universe closes. You're obviously a newbie, but that's cool, you're here to learn, like the rest of us. [1] 800 stairs at noon near the solstice in the tropics. Fun fun fun [2]. Microwave ductwork you could stand in. As a bonus, the US decided to stop bombing a Puerto Rican tourist isle while we were visiting. [2] With a 30+++ pound infant that insists on being carried, no less. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: septillion operations per second
Barry Wels wrote: Hi, In James Bamford's new book 'Body of Secrets' he claims the NSA is working on some FAST computers. http://www.randomhouse.com/features/bamford/book.html --- The secret community is also home to the largest collection of hyper-powerful computers, advanced mathematicians and skilled language experts on the planet. Within the city, time is measured in femtosecondsone million billionth of a second, and scientists work in secret to develop computers capable of performing more than one septillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) operations every second. --- If they ever build such a computer (or 1.000.000 of them) what would that mean for today's key lengths ? I am curious how long a computer capable of a septillion operations per second would take to crack one 128 bit or 256 bit key. Or a RSA 1024 or 2048 bit key for that matter ... 10^24 is roughly 2^80. So, to _count_ to 2^128 would take 2^48 seconds. That's around 9 million years. Or, for a million of them, 9 years. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html In Boston 'til 1st July. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cryptobox (was Re: Edupage, June 20, 2001)
At 5:08 PM -0600 on 6/20/01, EDUCAUSE wrote: PRIVATE LIFE Researchers at Ottawa University are developing Cryptobox, a program that encrypts e-mail, instant messages, and other Internet communications. The program works by sending transmissions over a peer-to-peer network, scrambling each end of the transmission with an encryption code and hiding it underneath a stream of junk traffic. The system automatically decodes the transmissions once they reach their destinations. The researchers have already tested Cryptobox in a network of 40 real and 200 virtual clients and report that the test succeeded. Independent researchers are skeptical, however. Richard Clayton, a computer scientist at Cambridge University, noted, It's unclear whether they can make this work and keep it stable in the real world with millions of systems. The program could, if successful on a large scale, solve one of the main security vulnerabilities of the Internet. Currently, e-mails, instant messages, and many other transmissions can be easily intercepted by those with access to key areas of a network. (New Scientist Online, 18 June 2001) -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: septillion operations per second
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Brodhead [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: take a peek at the chapter on key lengths in Schneier's Applied Cryptography. it is an entertaining read. in short, he makes the case that computers as we understand them simply cannot conduct brute force attacks against 128-bit or larger semetric keys. (i won't repeat his explanation here.) Actually, his explanation (which involves the energy required to erase bits) isn't correct; look up reversible computing, which is a way to do computations at lower energy than the limit he proposes. - Ian - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cryptobox (was Re: Edupage, June 20, 2001)
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 02:36:05PM +0100, R. A. Hettinga wrote: At 5:08 PM -0600 on 6/20/01, EDUCAUSE wrote: PRIVATE LIFE Researchers at Ottawa University are developing Cryptobox, a program that encrypts e-mail, instant messages, and other Internet communications. The program works by sending transmissions over a peer-to-peer network, scrambling each end of the transmission with an encryption code and hiding it underneath a stream of junk traffic. The system automatically decodes the transmissions once they reach their destinations. The researchers have already tested Cryptobox in a network of 40 real and 200 virtual clients and report that the test succeeded. Independent researchers are skeptical, however. Richard Clayton, a computer scientist at Cambridge University, noted, It's unclear whether they can make this work and keep it stable in the real world with millions of systems. The program could, if successful on a large scale, solve one of the main security vulnerabilities of the Internet. Currently, e-mails, instant messages, and many other transmissions can be easily intercepted by those with access to key areas of a network. ...unless they're running one of the myriad existing solutions (like IPSEC, PGP, S/MIME, SMTPS). I love it when journalists regurgitate press releases without doing even the most basic research. More on Cryptobox at: http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/11281.html and http://cryptobox.sourceforge.net/new/index.html Eric - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
