1997-05-14 - Re: Public Key Break Paper

Header Data

From: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: db9df6066e6a9057d9f0773af001d9631cc38fe713f475ccb33c478df13d0be5
Message ID: <5laovn$et@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>
Reply To: <1.5.4.32.19970513194224.00928884@pop.pipeline.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-05-14 02:22:21 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 10:22:21 +0800

Raw message

From: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 10:22:21 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Public Key Break Paper
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970513194224.00928884@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <5laovn$et@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


In article <1.5.4.32.19970513194224.00928884@pop.pipeline.com>,
John Young  <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
> In early April we posted a message which referred to
> William H. Payne's paper "Public Key Cryptography is
> Easy to Break."
> 
> Mr. Payne has provided the 1990 5-page draft paper 
> along with other documents, which we've added to the file
> at:
> 
>    http://jya.com/snlhit.htm

Thanks for posting.

I just took a brief look at it, (thanks for forwarding, Lucky),
and it's pure crap-ola.

[ ObTechnicalTrashing: the least x such that 2^x = 1 mod n is
very likely to be of order n, so 2^x (not modulo!) will be a
x-bit integer, and he ends up computing 2^x without doing any
reductions, so the work factor of his method is at least order
n.  Finding a prime factor by exhaustive search (try 2, 3, 5,
7, ...) would be more efficient... Sigh. ]






Thread