Re: Surrogate factoring, random is better?

jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 02/18/05 

Date: 17 Feb 2005 16:18:07 -0800

David Kastrup wrote:
> jstevh@msn.com writes:
>
> > I keeps seeing posters claiming that my surrogate factoring method
is
> > worse than even chance or at best only as good as a chance method
for
> > factoring.
> >
> > There are several problems with their assertion.
> >
> > That is, I suggest that they are lying.
>
> That's nothing new.
>
> > Here's why.
>
> [Nonsense snipped]
>
> > Well, suddenly you have *two* more variables, in a system that up
> > until now has been fully constrained, as you had three unknowns
with
> > two equations, where the final constraint is a rationality of
square
> > roots constraint.
> >
> > So guess what?
> >
> > If posters claiming my method doesn't work are right, then m is
> > basically a random number.
>
> No. Your method does not work because choosing m correctly is not
> shown to be any easier than factoring the original number.
>
> [More nonsense snipped]
>
> > Now then, I would be curious if any poster might reply explaining
how
> > there is some other possibility than I mentioned:
> >
> > 1. A perfect random number generator
> >
> > 2. A method that must work in some deterministic fashion.
>
> The method works in a deterministic fashion: you need to find
> particular values of m, and you give no relations or mechanisms for
> doing so that would not require more work than factoring by ggt with
> random numbers.
>
> I mean, that is the same principal problem with public key
> cryptography: obviously, there is a _deterministic_ relation between
> the public and the secret key. And it is easy to check that two keys
> belong to one key pair. But given only one key, the other is darn
> hard to find...
>
> And that's the same here: not given the factors of the original
> number, your m is still darn hard to find.
>

Yeah, but if you *know* the factors of M, then use them to figure out
what Ax factors M, then its denominator will be random, if you are
right.

That would mean you could use M's with known factors to perfectly
generate random numbers.

I make that point to highlight that some of you are acting outside of
reason, as I don't think it's random.

You can play stupid, but it won't help you later. And being in Germany
won't help you either as the German people will probably go after you
as well.

If there's no reason to the method, if it's as random as you people
claim, then necessarily it's a perfect random number generator.

If not, then you are, as I said, setting the world up for anyone who
can figure out how to get this to work, and if they are terrorist, then
God help everyone else, as you people have set them up like no one else
could, set them up for the worst case.

James Harris

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Surrogate factoring, random is better?
    ... >> I keeps seeing posters claiming that my surrogate factoring method ... >> worse than even chance or at best only as good as a chance method ... >> roots constraint. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Surrogate factoring and the k/T ratio
    ... posters claiming it worked no better than random. ... around how big k is relative to T--the k/T ratio. ... but I did do other checks and saw it factoring rather ... Exactly *where* did I try to lie? ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Surrogate factoring, random is better?
    ... I keeps seeing posters claiming that my surrogate factoring method is ... where the final constraint is the rationality of the square roots. ... That's a crucial point, and the first clue that posters must be lying, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Surrogate factoring, random is better?
    ... I keeps seeing posters claiming that my surrogate factoring method is ... where the final constraint is the rationality of the square roots. ... That's a crucial point, and the first clue that posters must be lying, ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Difference of squares ,SF Theorem
    ... > difference of squares, potentially non-trivial, like the SF Theorem ... In fact, factoring T j^2 as ... and the mathematics just does not show any preference for ... The chance that n is divisible by both p and q is 1/. ...
    (sci.crypt)