|
Security
consequences of possible proof of Riemann’s hypothesis I’ll not resume the news here, it’s was widely
done these days: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] and [9]. There is the proof of the
theorem [2] of Louis de
Branges [3] In the case that he is right and that we can
find how to use the hypothesis to make many one-way functions with prime
numbers not one-way anymore, what will be the consequences? For now, no one; in
the future, probably many with asymmetric encryption algorithms. If the dream
to prove this hypothesis comes true, you’ll can forget electronic commerce,
certification, digital signatures, TCP/IP security, secure telephones, just to
tell some. You’ll not be able to rely on public-key encryption anymore as a
easy to use method for encrypted distant transmission. We’ll live a boom of
“The new most secure ecommerce solution with our new full proof proprietary
public-key encryption algorithm”. Think about it, it took thousands years and
many brilliant ideas to be where we are now. Don’t think that it will take 2
weeks or 2 months to make a new leap in the field of public-key encryption.
When we’ll find a solution, it’ll need months and years to analyse and harden
algorithms. There are some of my reactions and toughs about
what come up in the news: Always
in [4] : “"This is one area where we
can stay ahead of the thieves," said Alan Canton,
president of security consulting and software firm Adams-Blake Company. "It does not
take nearly as long to come up with a new code or encryption methodology as it
does to crack it." Hummm, I think that Mr Canton needs to read The
Code Book. Does he know how it took time to arrive where we are? Yeah, for
the moment cryptographers are ahead of cryptanalysts. For how many time if the
hypothesis is proved true? Refer to history Mr Canton, it can teach us many
things sometimes, specially in the filed of cryptography. Just another thing that I wish to point out:
check the curriculum of this so-called president of security consulting and
software firm. Check his publications, etc. Personally, I cannot find out where
you can find his realisations as a security consultant. Therefore, you get his
words for what it is. I just say this to remember you that it’s always
interesting when you do research on what is said in an article. Be critic! It’s a privilege to have this piece of news.
It’s essential to think about news like this. Is the proof of Louis de Branges
true? Personally, I don’t care. I know that the possibility exist, it’s what I
care of. It’s like UFO, do they come on earth with there flying saucers? For now,
I don’t really care, but I know that the possibility exist and this is what
make it really interesting. The possibility! Can international terrorism can
shutdown our telephone systems by hacking them? The possibility exists. Will
they be able to do it? If so, will they do it? It’s another question. What I
know it’s that the possibility exist and that we need to take this in count
when telephone corporations will build security policies and extend there
networks, and try to build security systems. It’s what we care of. There are the links to Louis de Branges’s website and proof. [2]http://www.math.purdue.edu/ftp_pub/branges/apology.pdf There is an interesting article by Karl Sabbagh on
the character of Louis de Branges: There is the proof in the news: [5]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3794813.stm [6]http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/science/story/0,12996,1298812,00.html [7]http://www.vnunet.com/news/1157891 [8]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10706836%255E30417,00.html [9]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/846888.cms [10]http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/blog/archives/000035.html comment [] © Copyright 2005 FredOnSomething. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||