[rc5] keyspace flaw

Sean Reifschneider jafo at tummy.com
Wed Jun 4 00:59:48 EDT 1997

On Wed, Jun 04, 1997 at 02:08:47AM +0100, Chris Carlin wrote:
>Henry W Miller wrote:
>> aren't searched, we should assume that unreturned blocks are partially
>> searched.  Any server devoted to recycling keys *SHOULD* report half
>If we go all the way through the keyspace and don't find they magic key,
>then when we begin recycling pre-distributed keyblocks, maybe we should
>modify the clients to work them backwards to increase the chance that

Am I the only one who finds this discussion rather weird?  The only thing
we *KNOW* about any key blocks that haven't been returned is that we don't
know if the key exists anywhere in there.  We can't assume that half the
block was searched because that would be an invalid assumption.

Searching the key-blocks wouldn't help shorten the time any.  The network
is going through around 400 million keys per second.  On average, even
if the key were EXACTLY at the end of a block of 288M keys, we'd be saving
less than a second.  Since we don't know how much or even IF the keyblock was
searched at all.  The key just as well could be at the beginning or the

If you want to talk concerns, there are some rather LARGER concerns, but
I won't address them here.  No sense giving anyone ideas...

 "No early worm is giving ME the BIRD!" -- Bullwinkle J. Moose
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <jafo at tummy.com>
URL: <http://www.tummy.com/xvscan> HP-UX/Linux/FreeBSD/BSDOS scanning software.
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.

More information about the rc5 mailing list