[RC5] RC5/64 completion time by Deep Gene

Peter Cordes peter at u24n61.hfx.eastlink.ca
Tue Dec 28 20:19:48 EST 1999


On Fri, Dec 24, 1999 at 05:40:39PM -0600, Basil A. Daoust wrote:
> I think we are forgetting true attempts at code breaking don't start using
> brute force.  The very little I have read on encryption talks about 
> wonderful algorithms... different ones for each encryption technique.

  People use DES, RC5, IDEA, etc. because there are no known algorithms which
 work better than brute force.

> I noticed we talk here mostly about 56 and 64 bit encryption but netscape and
> Windows NT come with 128 bit encryption.  Again I don't know what algorithms are
> used as stated DES and CSC are not equally difficult to decrypt.

128bit RC5 or CSC should be essentially impossible to crack, unless someone cryptanalyzes one of them.  Without a cryptanalytic attack to drastically reduce
the amount of computation needed, it will take IIRC 10^14 years of all the
computers on earth running full time (at their current speed), to give a random number :)

 As for Blue Gene (the actual name of IBM's computer :), it would help _a lot_
for RC5-64.  I read that it has some cool stuff like RAM on chip for each CPU,
so it scales really well to lots of CPUs.  It is a general purpose computer,
and gene sequencing is probably integer work, so I bet it would rock at RC5.


#define X(x,y) x##y
DUPS Secretary ; http://is2.dal.ca/~dups/
Peter Cordes ;  e-mail: X(peter at cordes.phys. , dal.ca)

"The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours!
 Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack
 my day so wretchedly into small pieces!" -- Plautus, 200 BCE

--
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