sci.crypt
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
sci.crypt only
 
Advanced search
December 2006
motuwethfrsasuw
    123 48
45678910 49
11121314151617 50
18192021222324 51
25262728293031 52
2006
 Jan   Feb   Mar   Apr 
 May   Jun   Jul   Aug 
 Sep   Oct   Nov   Dec 
2008 2007 2006  
total
sci.crypt Profile…
RELATED GROUPS

POPULAR GROUPS

 Up
  Re: Halarious         


Author: Joseph Ashwood
Date: Dec 3, 2006 23:12

Yes I know I'm replying to what is arguably spam.

"Joe Hanston" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el0f8j$kqe$20@xstation.4096.net...
> this is the funiest thing ive seen. Link
[evidence the gene pool has a shallow end]

You need to get out more. You also need to learn how to spell "Hilarious"
how to use an apostrophe.

And please don't drink and park, accidents creates more morons. Let
evolution take it's course and eliminate your kind.
Joe
1 Comment
  Re: Cost of modexp's?         


Author: Tom St Denis
Date: Dec 3, 2006 21:05

Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> I have been looking at the various suggestions made (thanks!), and I am not
> impressed by any crypto hardware devices, the general-purpose microprocessor
> seems to give much better value. On all scales it seem that throwing an
> extra processor or twenty in is much better value than adding
> specifically-crypto hardware.

That's not always true. For the same size as an Opteron you can
totally blast it out of the water for performance. The problem [as you
mentioned] is the cost. Nobody is making volume [at least general
purpose] chips that do modexp, if they made them in the volumes GPUs
were being made they'd cost ~$300.

That said, on the lower end things are better. You can totally defeat
a PPC, ARM, or MIPS with a relatively small [re: fit in a decent mid to
high range FPGA] design. A good solution if you can't afford tapeout
:-)
> I suppose that's not too surprising, as the general microprocessor is one of
> the most highly-developed devices ever, and it is produced in numbers which
> dwarf any crypto chip.
Show full article (1.55Kb)
no comments
  Re: Cost of modexp's?         


Author: Peter Fairbrother
Date: Dec 3, 2006 20:34

BRG wrote:
> What surprised me a little was the relatively small factor (4:1) that
> the hardware Montgomery multiplier provided in speed over software.
>
> Their exponentiation algorithm can be improved considerably but I would
> have expected a larger factor over a pure software solution even with
> their algorithm.

I have been looking at the various suggestions made (thanks!), and I am not
impressed by any crypto hardware devices, the general-purpose microprocessor
seems to give much better value. On all scales it seem that throwing an
extra processor or twenty in is much better value than adding
specifically-crypto hardware.

I suppose that's not too surprising, as the general microprocessor is one of
the most highly-developed devices ever, and it is produced in numbers which
dwarf any crypto chip.

So it's a Tyan Typhoon or Nexxus 4000 (or a SiCortex SC5832, 5,832 64-bit
MIPS cores running on 18 kW, yum :) for me. I wish.

-- Peter Fairbrother

Quantum mechanics - the dream things are made of.
no comments
  Re: Cryptography in the UK...         


Author: Unruh
Date: Dec 3, 2006 16:03

zzz@att.net writes:
>Unruh wrote:
>> "Oliver_FF" hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>>I was just wondering how Cryptography stands in the UK with relation to
>>>current laws or anything...
>>
>>
>>>More specifically...
Show full article (1.73Kb)
1 Comment
  Call For Papers/Sessions: WORLDCOMP'07--multiple int'l. conferences in computer science & computer engineering, USA         


Author: A. M. G. Solo
Date: Dec 3, 2006 14:55

Call for Papers
and
Call for Session Proposals

The 2007 World Congress in Computer Science,
Computer Engineering, and Applied Computing
WORLDCOMP'07
(composed of 24 Joint Conferences)
June 25-28, 2007, Las Vegas, USA

Dear Colleagues:

You are invited to submit a draft paper and/or a proposal to organize
a session/workshop. All accepted papers will be published in the
respective conference proceedings. The Academic Co-sponsors of
WORLDCOMP'07 include: MIT Media Lab, MIT; Harvard University's
Statistical Genomics and Computational Biology Lab; Texas Advanced
Computing Center, The University of Texas at Austin; Statistical and
Computational Intelligence Lab of Purdue University; and University of
Iowa's Medical Imaging HPC Lab. A more complete list of sponsors can
be found below.
Show full article (11.14Kb)
no comments
  RSACryptoServiceProvider or similar         


Author: hula
Date: Dec 3, 2006 12:26

Hello out there

can anyone tell me if there exists something similar to
RSACryptoServiceProvider in C# that i can use to encode/decode messages
but
just the contrary way?
I mean having a private/public key on some app and use only the public
key on another app to decrypt the messages and the private+public key
on the "mastermachine".

All i want to do is shipping some data to some customers (via email
eg.) but have the data crypted.

I use c# in VS2005 with DotNet 2.0

thanks in advance
14 Comments
  Cryptography in the UK...         


Author: Oliver_FF
Date: Dec 3, 2006 11:04

I was just wondering how Cryptography stands in the UK with relation to
current laws or anything...

More specifically, lately i've been working on my own algorithm from
scratch and i've been enjoying it immensely. Would it be legal for me
to post about it, how it works, maybe offer up some free C++ source
code for people to check it out?

Or would it be a particularly bad idea?
33 Comments
  about joe-jobs/trolling         


Author: Tom St Denis
Date: Dec 3, 2006 03:07

To the troll who is joe-jobbing me,

I'm not going to stop working on my projects, or posting interesting
results here just because you feel the need to post your pornographic
filth everywhere. I work on my projects because *I WANT TO* work on my
projects. I'm intellectually curious and improving my projects is fun.
Even if one day, I had zero users because of all of the trolling in
the world, I'd still work on the projects.

Not only does a google search for libtomcrypt go to my real domain

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=libtomcrypt&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

But nobody in the cryptographic community is stupid enough to believe
that your joe-jobs are really associated with me. I can easily filter
out the replies I get from random usenet groups. So all you're doing
is annoying OTHER PEOPLE.

Give it a rest already.
Show full article (1.59Kb)
4 Comments