odayjuarez wrote: Mr. Beck wrote:I would bury the information, and do anything I could to find out whether anyone else had cracked it. Freedom needs good crypto in this age.
Maybe I've not understood your post, but why bury the information? I agree with your statement that freedom needs good cryptography, but keeping the crack a secret means that people will continue to use "unsafe" encryption. Of course there's every possibility that RSA is "unsafe" already, but if I happened to crack it I'd probably try to make it public knowledge somehow. At least that way people far smarter than me can try to come up with something better!
Hmmm... that makes a lot of sense. What I was thinking was that if I published the "solution", everyone's mail would be public instantly. The concept behind looking into other's being able to decode RSA is that I could alert the public if it was not secure. Now that I think about it, that makes no sense. The very act of me cracking it would make the code insecure. If I were to publish, but not reveal how, that would spur a lot of research into stronger public crypto. However, I would have to publish en masse
and anonymously, otherwise government intervention would be a serious concern. Then again, saying I had cracked it might very well lead to another replicating my results before we had developed accordingly stronger codes, thus defeating the goal of the exercise.
Out of curiosity, just how much brute-forcing would be needed to crack an average keystring? If, suppose, all of folding@home
were to wok on one, could it be cracked in reasonable length of time?