On Oct 26, 2014, at 2:22 PM, Yaron Sheffer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Re: the TWIRL correction (http://cs.tau.ac.il/~tromer/twirl/): 11 years on, I > wonder why we still don't have any 1024-bit factorizations, given that the > machine's cost should have gone down to around $100K (applying Moore's law > and vigorous hand-waving). There are many possible reasons, but I suspect that the best one is "working on post-TWIRL engines in secret is yielding good results". The fact that Shamir et. al. did their work in public does not mean that others will continue to do so. > Yes, we need to correct the bit-length estimate. Thank you. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
