On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Chris Walters wrote: > Dirk Heinrichs wrote: > | If it is so easy for them to crack our ciphers (and the one they > | use themselves, btw.), why doesn't Kasperky ask them to crack the > | key of the GPCode virus which, according to Kaspersky's > | assumptions, would keep 15 million modern PCs busy for a year. > | > | And, if it is so easy for them, it is as easy for other governments > | too, right? That would mean they use a cipher that's easily > | crackable by other governments. Do you really think they do? > > I didn't say it was "easy". All I said is that it is possible, with > enough resources, to crack keys. I very much doubt that the NSA > would be interested in cracking the key of the GPCode virus, since > they are more directed to the National Security of the US. > > As for other governments, if they have large networks of > supercomputers, and cryptanalysis experts, then it would probably be > just as probable that they could crack any key from any publicly used > cipher algorithm.
This is the point where I start to ask for a citation and stop listening to theoretical possibilities and things that might possibly could be. Unless of course the exact meaning of phrases like "three hundred thousand million years" has a different meaning in your universe than it does in mine. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- [email protected] mailing list
