You can't say how long they need to decrypt anything as long as you don't know
which hardware and supercomputers the NSA exactly uses. And we will never know
more than gossip.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Walters
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 20:25:17
To:
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] NSA su
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:55:40PM -0400, Gregory Disney wrote:
> Just saying TOR was created by the Naval Research Laboratory a part of
The name's Tor, not TOR.
> DARPA. Since it's inception they could index, spider and track the dark
> net.
___
tor-ta
I would love to see an analysis of a 128 bit AES encryption VS a 10 exoflop
computer. How long to crack it? Anyone got the math on this?
Andreas, your absolutely right, However we can do some estimating.
Just keep in mind... garbage in, garbage out.. but this is a pretty good
guess.
So the fast
I saw a lecture a while back, I think it was given by Whitfield Diffie of
public/ private key fame although it was quite a while ago... , The
speaker said that the gov was storing encrypted messages that have been
intercepted from critical sources in hopes that quantum computing will
allow them to
Some days ago I read that the first usable Quantumcomputing System is on the
market. Can some estimate how this possibly influences the decryption of
different ciphers?
Andreas
-Original Message-
From: Andrew F
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:51:06
To:
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] NSA supercomput
Gregory Disney wrote:
> Just saying TOR was created by the Naval Research Laboratory a part of
> DARPA. Since it's inception they could index, spider and track the dark
> net.
The Naval Research Lab didn't "create" Tor, unless you think that grant
money is physically capable of writing code.
R
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5 Apr 2013, at 19:01, Andrew F wrote:
> The
> speaker said that the gov was storing encrypted messages that have been
> intercepted from critical sources in hopes that quantum computing will
> allow them to crack the encryptions eventually.
But b
On 04/05/2013 06:01 PM, Andrew F wrote:
> I saw a lecture a while back, I think it was given by Whitfield Diffie of
> public/ private key fame although it was quite a while ago... , The
> speaker said that the gov was storing encrypted messages that have been
> intercepted from critical sources in
It's related to Linux NTP and SRTP.
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:26 PM, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jacob Appelbaum wrote (19 Jul 2012 23:48:48 GMT) :
> > intrigeri:
> >> So, Jake tells me that ChromeOS will use tlsdate by default, and that
> >> this should solve the fingerprinting issue. Therefore,
Hi,
Jacob Appelbaum wrote (19 Jul 2012 23:48:48 GMT) :
> intrigeri:
>> So, Jake tells me that ChromeOS will use tlsdate by default, and that
>> this should solve the fingerprinting issue. Therefore, I assume this
>> implicitly answer the (half-rhetorical, I admit) question I asked in
>> March, and
George, thank for posting. And perhaps you should read a little closer
before you get critical
I posted this question at the top of my post because I was looking for
someone like you, (well a little nicer) to help us with the math.
Also, I was only restating lectures that I have heard over the
On 04/05/2013 01:01 PM, Andrew F wrote:
>
> Basically he said that with quantum computing all bets are off and every
> cipher today will likely be cracked. Quantum computing will require new
> kinds of ciphers and only those with Qcomputers will be able to decrypt the
> messages.
Not entirely cor
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Andrew F wrote:
> I would love to see an analysis of a 128 bit AES encryption VS a 10 exoflop
> computer. How long to crack it? Anyone got the math on this?
[...]
> So what does this mean? Any article that suggest that brute forcing
> present day encryption is no
Anthony, good point. And worth a lot more then $0.02
Thanks Seth excellent write up. I will have to brake out the sci
calculator and run some number.
I know the flops issue is a big one, but thats the only measure I could
find for the big system in Utah.
However, your point is well taken. No w
Andrew F writes:
> So lets look at this from another view. How fast does a computer have to
> be to fully bruit force a 64,128,256 key? ZettaFlops? YottaFlops?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flops Lets assume a classical
> computer.
>
> George, crankup that abacus of yours and let u
Seth David Schoen writes:
> the number of decryptions attempted by a brute force search is given by
>
> decryptions = speed × elapsed time
More generally,
things = things/moment × moments
--
Seth Schoen
Senior Staff Technologist https://www.eff.org/
Electronic Frontier
Gregory Disney:
> Lol use a VPN with tor
With respect, I don't think this kind of answers are helpful for anyone,
sir.
___
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
> Guys, if you are in trouble with NSA, or other US governmentals agency,
> you're screwed. Physically. Don't mind your electronical com'.
totally agree.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/29/fbi_stingray_mobile_tracking/
--
[]s Fosforo
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 04:45:57PM -0700, Andrea Shepard wrote:
> [1] Since you can test whether a key is correct in polynomial time using two
> blocks of ciphertext, search for keys is in NP and being able to rigorously
> prove security for a block cipher would imply P != NP as a corollary.
Apolo
Andrew F writes:
> You know, if anyone has an Nvidia Xk20 and an AMD 16 core working together,
> we could test on a small scale and then extrapolate from there, get an
> estimate of efficiency per second and do the calculations. If anyone wants
> to mess around with it and has the hardware... :-
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:51:06PM +, Andrew F wrote:
> I would love to see an analysis of a 128 bit AES encryption VS a 10 exoflop
> computer. How long to crack it? Anyone got the math on this?
>
> Andreas, your absolutely right, However we can do some estimating.
> Just keep in mind... garb
21 matches
Mail list logo
