[RC5] Keyserver idea

Marc Sissom msissom at dnaent.com
Tue Jun 23 12:35:35 EDT 1998

Joe Zbiciak wrote:
> 'Paul Turpie' said previously:
> | Now that I think about it, is it even still necessary to randomly hand out
> | keys. [...]
> This brings up an interesting point... we no longer really need to
> randomize *within* a subspace, since we trounce subspaces pretty darn
> quickly as compared to our keyrate during RC5-56.  Instead, we need
> probably to randomize our order of traversal *between* subspaces.  :-)

Seems pretty random already ;-)

The whole idea of randomizing the path through the keyspace
came out as a perversion of the original "cooperative" ideal.
As is normal for humans, greed and competitive nature won out.
Instead of cooperating, groups were competing. Actually, the
bovine leadership was the only one competing. The other groups
did publicly display their keyspace coverage in the earlier

Anyway, the keyspace maps are displayed, the clients produce
logs, so the current and past keyspaces are public data. There
are no other groups in this class, so why not relieve the
master and revert to a simple sequential allocation of the

I've asked this question before and never recieved an answer.

Marc Sissom                       http://www.dnaent.com
Design Engineer                     voice: 972/644-3301
DNA Enterprises, Inc.                 fax: 972/644-6338
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list