cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1996-06-03 - Re: Fate of Ecash if RSA is cracked?

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis)
Message Hash: 4575fd671753ce84b80d6dce24ff9aabbeeaa31dbabe69d50690bce46bdffb14
Message ID: <199606031601.MAA05367@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <N9BXoD32w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-03 21:41:40 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 05:41:40 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 05:41:40 +0800
To: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis)
Subject: Re: Fate of Ecash if RSA is cracked?
In-Reply-To: <N9BXoD32w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199606031601.MAA05367@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Dr. Dimitri Vulis writes:
> ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> > scheme gets broken somehow? Suppose, for example, that someone
> > discovers an ultra-fast factoring algorithm or something like that.
> 
> This'll happen, probably sooner than later.

Why do you assume that? There are plenty of problems that are
provably not solvable in non-exponential time even if P=NP. What makes
you think this one is going to be solved?

.pm

Thread