Re: planet sized processors (Re: On what the NSA does with its tech)

2004-08-05 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 06:16:14PM -0400, Adam Back wrote: The planet sized processor stuff reminds me of Charlie Stross' sci-fi short story Scratch Monkey which features nanotech, planet sized Not a coincidence, as he's been mining diverse transhumanist/extropian communities for raw bits.

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread John Kelsey
From: Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 2, 2004 11:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: On what the NSA does with its tech ... What they can do is implement an advanced dictionary search that includes the kind of mnemonic tricks and regexps that folks

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Dave Howe
Morlock Elloi wrote: Hint: all major cryptanalytic advances, where governments broke a cypher and general public found out few *decades* later were not of brute-force kind. all generalizations are false, including this one. most of the WWII advances in computing were to brute-force code engines,

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Pete Capelli
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:07:23 +0100, Dave Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: all generalizations are false, including this one. Is this self-referential?

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Dave Howe
Pete Capelli wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:07:23 +0100, Dave Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: all generalizations are false, including this one. Is this self-referential? yes - some generalizations are accurate - and its also a quote, but I may have misworded it so I didn't quotemark it or supply an

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Morlock Elloi
The impracticability of breaking symmetric ciphers is only a comparatively small part of the overall problem. I see that it can be done only by brute farce myth is live and well. Hint: all major cryptanalytic advances, where governments broke a cypher and general public found out few *decades*

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Major Variola (ret)
At 02:23 AM 8/5/04 +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote: The impracticability of breaking symmetric ciphers is only a comparatively small part of the overall problem. Indeed. Following Schneier's axiom, go for the humans, it would not be too hard to involutarily addict someone to something which the

Re: planet sized processors (Re: On what the NSA does with its tech)

2004-08-05 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 06:16:14PM -0400, Adam Back wrote: The planet sized processor stuff reminds me of Charlie Stross' sci-fi short story Scratch Monkey which features nanotech, planet sized Not a coincidence, as he's been mining diverse transhumanist/extropian communities for raw bits.

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Thomas Shaddack
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Hal Finney wrote: As you can see, breaking 128 bit keys is certainly not a task which is so impossible that it would fail even if every atom were a computer. If we really needed to do it, it's not outside the realm of possibility that it could be accomplished within 50

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread John Kelsey
From: Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 2, 2004 11:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: On what the NSA does with its tech .. What they can do is implement an advanced dictionary search that includes the kind of mnemonic tricks and regexps that folks

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Pete Capelli
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:07:23 +0100, Dave Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: all generalizations are false, including this one. Is this self-referential?

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-05 Thread Dave Howe
Pete Capelli wrote: On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:07:23 +0100, Dave Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: all generalizations are false, including this one. Is this self-referential? yes - some generalizations are accurate - and its also a quote, but I may have misworded it so I didn't quotemark it or supply an

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Hal Finney
MV writes: Yes. They can't break a 128 bit key. That's obvious. (if all the atoms in the universe were computers... goes the argument). Not necessarily, if nanotechnology works. 128 bits is big but not that big. Eric Drexler, in Nanosystems, section 12.9, predicts that a nanotech based

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Jack Lloyd
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 11:04:15AM -0700, Hal Finney wrote: [...] The system will consume 10^25 * 60 nanowatts or about 6 * 10^17 watts. Now, that's a lot. It's four times what the earth receives from the sun. So we have to build a disk four times the area (not volume) of the earth, collect

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 04:44:58PM -0400, Jack Lloyd wrote: If I did my unit conversions right, such a disk would be over 30,000 miles in Drexler's estimate for computers are coservative (purely mechanical rod logic). SWNT-based reversible logic (in spintronics? even utilizing nontrivial

planet sized processors (Re: On what the NSA does with its tech)

2004-08-04 Thread Adam Back
The planet sized processor stuff reminds me of Charlie Stross' sci-fi short story Scratch Monkey which features nanotech, planet sized processors which colonize space and build more planet-sized processors. The application is upload, real-time memory backup, and afterlife in DreamTime

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Thomas Shaddack
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Hal Finney wrote: As you can see, breaking 128 bit keys is certainly not a task which is so impossible that it would fail even if every atom were a computer. If we really needed to do it, it's not outside the realm of possibility that it could be accomplished within 50

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Major Variola (ret)
At 02:23 AM 8/5/04 +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote: The impracticability of breaking symmetric ciphers is only a comparatively small part of the overall problem. Indeed. Following Schneier's axiom, go for the humans, it would not be too hard to involutarily addict someone to something which the

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Morlock Elloi
The impracticability of breaking symmetric ciphers is only a comparatively small part of the overall problem. I see that it can be done only by brute farce myth is live and well. Hint: all major cryptanalytic advances, where governments broke a cypher and general public found out few *decades*

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Jack Lloyd
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 11:04:15AM -0700, Hal Finney wrote: [...] The system will consume 10^25 * 60 nanowatts or about 6 * 10^17 watts. Now, that's a lot. It's four times what the earth receives from the sun. So we have to build a disk four times the area (not volume) of the earth, collect

Re: On what the NSA does with its tech

2004-08-04 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 04:44:58PM -0400, Jack Lloyd wrote: If I did my unit conversions right, such a disk would be over 30,000 miles in Drexler's estimate for computers are coservative (purely mechanical rod logic). SWNT-based reversible logic (in spintronics? even utilizing nontrivial