1994-06-17 - Re: Prime magnitude and keys…a ?

Header Data

From: Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>
To: sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu (SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N)
Message Hash: fe38a1b3b12bfc834ab3d3c9d8d8c86bbbb6ab16e045c774f4801410719a5e54
Message ID: <199406172333.SAA22749@zoom.bga.com>
Reply To: <94Jun17.165505edt.11416@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-06-17 23:34:18 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 17 Jun 94 16:34:18 PDT

Raw message

From: Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 94 16:34:18 PDT
To: sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu (SINCLAIR  DOUGLAS N)
Subject: Re: Prime magnitude and keys...a ?
In-Reply-To: <94Jun17.165505edt.11416@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
Message-ID: <199406172333.SAA22749@zoom.bga.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text

> I think you misunderstand.  Perry and I are talking about the
> algormithm (If it exists) being O(log_2(n)).  That is, "log base 2 of n".
> This means that the time taken is proportional to the log to the base
> two of the number of keys.
> Fascinating as this speculation is, I see no way to craft such
> an algorithm.  The nature of the modular space makes "larger"
> and "smaller" difficult to distinguish.
I have made submission of a short text which details my thoughts relating
to a mod function attack. 

I am under no illusion about the complexity of mounting a factor attack.
I do see the mod function as the next natural hole to look at the algorithm
through. I can find no work relating to periodicities in the mod function
and it occurs to me that such relationships might point the way...