[RC5] RC5-64 HAS BEEN SOLVED

Granzow, Doug (NCI) granzowd at mail.nih.gov
Fri Sep 27 11:18:08 EDT 2002


>PPS: I don't understand why work is "wasted" if it is not credited in the
>stats.
>We did the work to find the RC5 key (and therfor prove that rc5-64 is
easyly
>breakable) and BTW _ALL_ work done after the key has found is wasted ...

Whether or not the work was 'wasted' doesn't change the fact that the work
was done, and the stats should reflect the work that was done.  Cutting off
the stats at the point that someone submitted the key amounts to revisionist
history.  The fact is, work continued.  The fact is, the key went unnoticed
for some time.  This is the reality of the situation, and by cutting the
stats off at July 13th you are simply denying reality.  IMHO, if you are
going to cut the stats off at July 13th because that is when the project
*should* have ended, then you may as well go back to the 50% point and cut
off the stats there, since *on average* that is where the search would end.
--
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