On 5/15/2014 8:30 AM, gnupg-users@gnupg.org wrote: > The save of 64 bits to 1 bit loses you 6 bits exponential complexity, > the increase of the expected number of tries increases it again by 1 > bit, so you have saved 2^5 = 32 = 10^1.5 on the numbers Rob gives. When > I'm quickly reading through the calculations, it seems we changed it > from 100 nuclear warheads to only 3, to scan the whole keyspace.
Huh: neat! It doesn't surprise me that there are interesting ways to tweak the numbers: my calculation is something that would have to assume vast pretensions of standing just to be considered worthy to go on the back of a bar napkin. :) > The thing I'm saying is: the explanation for taking 10^2 as the amount > of bitflips for a single try doesn't seem convincing. It makes it seem > that you can actually save computation by linearly searching your keyspace. Point. If/when I make a revision of it I'll review it. :) _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users