On 1/15/10 1:59 AM, Karsten Nohl wrote:
> Number of tables * tables height = 2 TB
> or:  n  * h * k * 2^l = 2^37
> => k * l = 2^17.62
>
>   
a few preliminary remarks:

=== storage ===

A hidden parameter here, which isn't listed explicitly in the sheet, is 
the amount of storage per chain.

2 TB equates to 2^37 chains, so it appears to be 2^4 bytes or 128 bits - 
sounds like a start and an end value, of both 64 bits.

I thought that even in the current tables they are smaller, and 
discussions have had place which led to the conclusion that it should be 
possible to store:
- only 24 bits of end value (that's 64 bits minus 15 DP zeroes minus 25 
bits of index - the current practice)
- only 30 bits of start value (when mapping an index value through some 
start-value generator, where in this case 2^30 should cover the number 
of chains, including dropped merges since they have taken up one index 
value)

for a total of 54 bits per chain, or 4.7 Gb for 750m table height (with 
less than 250m chains dropped through merges, else add 1 bit). That 
would lead to 851 Gb tables total instead of 2 TB.

(plus the index, which can be cracked down to negligible size)

=== cracking ===

The number of keystream segments is listed in the sheet as 4*(144-63). 
(This looks like it should read 114 instead of 144 to get the familiar 
4*51=204 figure.)

http://reflextor.com/trac/a51/wiki/GSMBasics talks about 3 bursts we know.

I can't find out where these 3 or 4 bursts of known plaintext exactly 
originate. Have we identified 4 individual bursts of known plaintext, or 
are these connected, in the sense that two bursts are a reply to the other?

If so, two strings of 114 bits cipher are generated from one state, one 
for the burst BTS-->MS and one for the way back.

Since in between appearantly nothing happens to the cipher, I'm tempted 
to think that for 4 bursts (2 up, 2 down) we have 2*((2*114)-63)=330 
chances of finding a 64 bit keystream.

=== attack time ===

The (CPU) attack time is calculated as if the distribution of keystreams 
we encounter is random. It isn't. There are preferred states. The same 
goes for our new tables. I don't dare to give an exact estimation, but 
if the time is more than halved I wouldn't be surprised.

And always start searching from the end of the keystream, it more than 
doubles chances of finding a hit.

Regards,
M.

_______________________________________________
A51 mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lists.reflextor.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a51

Reply via email to