Re: Public Key, Set-(bi)partition
From: Kiuhnm (invalid_at_invali.it)
Date: 04/25/04
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: NSA,Windows, etc."
- Previous message: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: using a MAC with a very short message"
- In reply to: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Public Key, Set-(bi)partition"
- Next in thread: David Wagner: "Re: Public Key, Set-(bi)partition"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:00:52 GMT
Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> Kiuhnm wrote:
>
> [snipped, I'm having trouble with the notation]
I'm very sorry.
<A, X> is a "inner product" and means:
a_1*x_1 + a_2*x_2 + a_3*x_3 + ... + a_n*x_n.
Then
<A, X>*<B, X> = (a_1*x_1 + .... + a_n*x_n)*(b_1*x_1 + ... + b_n*x_n) =
a simple polynomial product.
> Didn't Diffie try that a long time ago, in his (heroic) search for a
> working PK system?
Perhaps...
> Was it was mentioned in the original SciAm RSA article, or something
> aeound then? I'm a bit hazy on the details, but wasn't it broken like
> knapsacks?
All the knapsacks where broken with lattice reduction or similar methods.
But my method use the *real* NP-Hard problem, not a simplified or particular
one, and, as you know, no one know a practical method to solve a NP-Hard
problem.
> Could be completely wrong here.
Don't worry.
Kiuhnm
- Next message: Mxsmanic: "Re: NSA,Windows, etc."
- Previous message: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: using a MAC with a very short message"
- In reply to: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Public Key, Set-(bi)partition"
- Next in thread: David Wagner: "Re: Public Key, Set-(bi)partition"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]