cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1996-07-23 - Re: Borders are transparent

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4bd11d2add874007e1b19fd4c51c1bacce2ede7397e552a0a0d01f50f5e68d92
Message ID: <199607221830.OAA12526@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <199607221650.EAA01429@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-23 02:57:04 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 10:57:04 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 10:57:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Borders *are* transparent
In-Reply-To: <199607221650.EAA01429@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz>
Message-ID: <199607221830.OAA12526@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Perhaps a Java page containing a DES cracker that one could run for
the casual participant, and a set of links to download a real cracker
for the non-casual participant...

I think its really time that we did this. DES must be shown to be
dead.

When the media hear about it, they will, of course, get "experts"
saying "but it took five thousand people millions of dollars in
computer time". We should ask Matt Blaze to write a paper in advance
explaining that although this test, on general hardware, took a lot of
effort, that with specialized hardware it would be cheap as can be.

Perry

Paul Foley writes:
> "Peter Trei" <trei@process.com> wrote:
> 
>    Any one up for a distributed brute force attack on single DES? My 
>    back-of-the-envelope calculations and guesstimates put this on the
>    hairy edge of doability (the critical factor is how many machines can
>    be recruited - a non-trivial cash prize would help). 
> 
> Not quite sure what you mean by "doability" -- it's obviously doable,
> it just depends how long you want to wait.
> 
> I'm in.

Thread