cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-04-16 - Re: RSA-130 Falls to NFS - Lenstra Posting to sci.crypt.research

Header Data

From: Bruce Marshall <brucem@wichita.fn.net>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: e21c0ea77c4a33a9228310fc1d350a34d371fe32b88f6014e2d4a419bde635ed
Message ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.960416090319.2962C-100000@wichita.fn.net>
Reply To: <199604151824.LAA07600@netcom6.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-16 18:27:35 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 02:27:35 +0800

Raw message

From: Bruce Marshall <brucem@wichita.fn.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 02:27:35 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: RSA-130 Falls to NFS - Lenstra Posting to sci.crypt.research
In-Reply-To: <199604151824.LAA07600@netcom6.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.960416090319.2962C-100000@wichita.fn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Mon, 15 Apr 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> I have been wondering about malicious hackers getting into these
> pools. would it be possible for them to contribute false data
> that screws up the end results? or are such anomalies easily
> discarded or disregarded by the final processes?

> future implementors of these programs might amuse themselves with
> trying to create such safeguards or anticipate such "attacks" which
> are pretty significant the more the processes become distributed.

    I guess I would have to ask you why you think hackers would be 
interested in these projects in the first place?  Your typical hacker 
would care very little about such a project and in fact may be interested 
in seeing it succeed.  

    However, I do feel that you may have a valid point when switching 
"hackers" to "opponents of the research."  Anyone with an interest in 
preventing or slowing down the progress in such a project would be more 
dangerous in my mind than your average hacker.  

    Preventing that from happening would be necessary if it is decided 
that such a threat truly exists. 

Bruce Marshall

Thread