Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:17:26 ADT
Lewis McCarthy (lmccarth@cs.umass.edu)
Sun, 17 May 1998 22:19:03 -0400
Bruce Schneier writes:
> Isn't this nonsense?
I can't tell from the talk abstract, which is the most detailed exposition
I found on the web.
> The modern factoring methods (NFS and its variants)
> work much better than Pollard Rho, and don't care about these "strong prime"
> characteristics. Why should I bother optimizing my primes against attacks
> that are less efficient than attacks that don't care about my optimizations?
Agreed. The first clause of the talk title, "Some New Pollard
Rho's" [...], suggests that Seberry and Gysin have extended the Rho method
to make it competitive again in certain circumstances. That would be a
different story, but I haven't seen sufficient explanation of the claims
to decide whether that's really the case.
--
Lewis http://www.cs.umass.edu/~lmccarth/
"This information is so readily available to anybody who wants to commit an act
of terrorism that you have to assume the security community's real interest is
to raise attentiveness to their role in preventing terrorism in the hope that
they can increase their budget"
--Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution,
(as quoted by CNN) on objections to the EPA listing chemical
storage site locations on the Web
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:17:26 ADT