[RC5] RC5 question

Daniel Quintiliani coredump0 at mercurylink.net
Fri Oct 3 20:10:14 EDT 2003

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 19:03:10 -0300, Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho 
<decio at revistapcs.com.br> wrote:

> If you factor in new participants and Moore's Law (which dictates an 
> exponential growth of processing power with time), RC5-72 is doable, 
> whereas RC5-128 is utterly hopeless, short of a very clever attack on the 
> RC5 cipher.
> Frankly I don't see the point of running a contest that has absolutely no 
> chance whatsoever of finishing. Then again, The Neo Project was doing 
> just that with the RSA factoring contests, albeit in a much larger scale 
> (meaning it was even more hopeless), and people still helped them.
> Décio

You just don't look at it as a contest. There were no prizes for SETI, or 
for our OGR, and still they're fun. I ran SETI for 3 years up until last 
summer. I knew the likelihood of me finding ET, and when the project 
finished I noticed that my name wasn't on the list of good workunits, but 
it was still a fun thing to do. (I did get annoyed later when I heard that 
they were going to delete the statistics.) Anyway, these things are just 
fun to do. I'm just suggesting that 128-bit would be more fun than 72-bit 
since it would be more relevant today.


More information about the rc5 mailing list