Can someone please correct me? We don't know polynomial CVP/SVP algorithms correct? In fact, isn't SVP an NP-Hard problem? Why would this "destroy" RSA?
“This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
11–20 of 152 posts
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#12They only tested with numbers size of ~2^800, which is around 240 digits, but I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) there exists usages of RSA with over 600 digits, so it'll still take a massively long amount of time to factor those numbers...
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#13The author of this paper is Claus P. Schnorr[1], of Schnorr signature fame.
The paper has almost the same title as a 2017 draft paper[2] of his. The “This destroyes the RSA cryptosystem” quote is not in the linked paper abstract. This seems fishy.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_P._Schnorr
[2] https://www.math.uni-frankfurt.de/~dmst/research/papers/SVP9...
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#14Well, that's certainly provacative, can the title be updated to the title of the paper and year (2019)? "Factoring Integers by CVP and SVP Algorithms"
It is a direct quote from the end of the abstract. The paper could hardly be titled that way. It is editorialising and thus against the guidelines.. but it's reasonable IMO. It would hardly be getting such attention with the original title, and that attention is either what it needs, or what it needs to promptly dispell it.
not a direct quote since the quote in the paper has a typo: “destroyes”
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#15They only tested with numbers size of ~2^800, which is around 240 digits, but I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) there exists usages of RSA with over 600 digits, so it'll still take a massively long amount of time to factor those numbers...
Typical key lengths for RSA these days are 2048 and 4096 bits.
I don't know what that means for this paper, just happened to have those two key lengths off the top of my head.
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#16I'm out of my depth. Disclaimer applied, I genuinely wonder how fast this "fast factoring" method is in this case?
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#17Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#18Would someone competent in cryptography please explain this to a “regular” programmer?
Yeah, if this really is fast prime factoring, we're all in a lot of trouble.
If that's the case it's funny to think... NSA could have sat on this for years. Though that would be a really hard secret to keep.
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a direct quote from the end of the abstract. The paper could hardly be titled that way. It is editorialising and thus against the guidelines.. but it's reasonable IMO. It would hardly be getting such attention with the original title, and that attention is either what it needs, or what it needs to promptly dispell it.
not a direct quote since the quote in the paper has a typo: “destroyes”
that sentence is not in the paper, only on the linked page
EDIT: deleting claim about name, matches other places
seems somewhat fishy, I'll wait what experts say in the next few days...
Re: “This destroys the RSA cryptosystem”
#20This last sentence of the abstract, "This destroyes the RSA cryptosystem", does not appear on the abstract of the actual PDF (which also appears to be dated).
How does it destroy RSA? Under what conditions? That claim sounds rather broad and definitely bold, to say the least.