From: Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 06:13:38 PST
To: cfrye@ciis.mitre.org (Curtis D. Frye)
Subject: Re: Crypto and new computing strategies
In-Reply-To: <9403302057.AA13529@ciis.mitre.org>
Message-ID: <199403311413.AA02419@zoom.bga.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> 
> You wrote:
> 
> >The point I am making is that the logical rules you use don't apply down here.
> 
> I believe I see what you mean - your argument is that there's no way to
> know whether or not there will be a dramatic increase in computational
> ability through QM, whether it be through brute force or "smarter" quantum
> techniques.  What comes to mind immediately is a quantum-oriented genetic
> decryption algorithm running on a QM computer.  If this algorithm could
> sense and maintain memory of subtle c-text differences, it could make
> optimizing choices toward eventual decryption.
> 
> I guess my confusion came from the notion that "well, you're only examining
> one part of the state space at any given instant, so what's the big deal so
> long as we increase key length to compensate" ?  Under QM, it seems that
> leaps, somewhat akin to human "intuition", could occur.
> 
> I hope I'm closer to understanding your point.
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> 
> Curtis D. Frye - Job Search Underway!!!
> cfrye@ciis.mitre.org or cfrye@mason1.gmu.edu
> "Here today, gone ?????"
> 
> 
> 
That sums up pretty nicely. Another aspect that I was getting at is that this
is new and using the old rules to handle new technology has always been proven
wrong historicaly. And I figure it is a cinch that Big Brother won't tell us
ahead of time if we are wrong.

Take care.