[RC5] RC5 question
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.
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