David Schwartz wrote:
RSA is reversible. I never claimed otherwise. What I said is: "So /dev/random tries
to provide truly random numbers while /dev/urandom tries to provide only
cryptographically-secure pseudo-random numbers. It's as assured by the implementation as
RSA assures that its operations are irreversible."
This is precisely correct. In both cases, the operations are possible in theory
but impossible in practice -- by careful and deliberate design.
David, we count on RSA being reversible, that's how it's designed. One-way
hash functions are presumably irreversible. Your "knowledge" of cryptography
hasn't improved, you should go home now.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [email protected]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
