Re: Surrogate factoring explained
From: Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho (decio_at_decpp.removethis.net)
Date: 02/24/05
- Next message: Andrew Swallow: "Re: Virtual Account Numbers"
- Previous message: Peter Wozniak: "Re: Is a cryptographic monoculture hurting us all?"
- In reply to: ođin: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Next in thread: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Reply: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:06:08 -0300
ođin wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> The entire point of surrogate factoring is to render that useless by
>> what is esentially a back-door attack of shifting the factorization
>> from the hard target to an easier surrogate, which is factored, and its
>> factors are then used to factor the target.
>
> Can you prove that the surrogate is easy? Is it just that you are saying
> that the surrogate are not specially chosen? I doubt that the surrogate is
> easier, especially given that it is much bigger.
You're about as stubborn as James itself.
First of all, the surrogate can be factored algebraically as (M + j)(M - j),
so it's no more than twice as hard to factor as M itself. If j is chosen at
random, each of M + j and M - j will have a few small factors, and after
dividing those out, it's likely that factoring both M + j and M - j by NFS
will be easier than factoring M. But that's the brute-force way; if j is
chosen wisely (and I've shown time and time again that it's possible to do
this with low cost), then both M + j and M - j are very easy to factor.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, even with a very inefficient sieve programmed
in PARI/GP, it's a matter of a couple of minutes to find a suitable
surrogate for RSA-2048, for instance.
James' algorithms has flaws, but this isn't one of them. So please drop this
argument already.
Décio
- Next message: Andrew Swallow: "Re: Virtual Account Numbers"
- Previous message: Peter Wozniak: "Re: Is a cryptographic monoculture hurting us all?"
- In reply to: ođin: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Next in thread: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Reply: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring explained"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|