Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited
From: ošin (ošin_at_ragnarok.com)
Date: 02/08/05
- Next message: ošin: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Previous message: tomstdenis_at_gmail.com: "Re: Public Key, Symbolic Calculation"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Next in thread: Tim Peters: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Reply: Tim Peters: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:19:34 -0800
> Those of you who actually know about public key encryption know that
> the two prime factors are carefully chosen to make the number hard to
> factor, so the process of picking some j, to get M^2 - j^2 would
> disrupt that choosing.
Nope. They are not carefully chosen. If that were true, then there would be
a much smaller set to test against, making it easier to break into. The main
thing is that the factors should be both large, but not close to eachother
in value. So it seems that your idea depends on a false assumption. But
probably, T is no easier to factor than M.
- Next message: ošin: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Previous message: tomstdenis_at_gmail.com: "Re: Public Key, Symbolic Calculation"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Next in thread: Tim Peters: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Reply: Tim Peters: "Re: Factoring problem, my assertion revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]