Timeline for Is Wiener's attack on RSA extendable to larger keys with low hamming weight?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 2012 at 23:25 | answer | added | D.W. | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 18, 2012 at 16:19 | answer | added | Antimony | timeline score: 6 | |
| May 18, 2012 at 20:15 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCrypto/status/203579662591471617 | ||
| May 16, 2012 at 21:48 | history | edited | Paŭlo Ebermann | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
rewording, better title, formatting
|
| May 6, 2012 at 12:38 | history | edited | user46 |
edited tags
|
|
| May 6, 2012 at 7:05 | answer | added | fgrieu♦ | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 6, 2012 at 6:23 | history | edited | fgrieu♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| May 4, 2012 at 21:20 | history | migrated | from security.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Mar 21, 2011 at 22:27 | comment | added | SecureFish | I implemented the wiener's attack with continued fraction algorithm. It can resolve (160523347,60728973) ----> d = 37 (8973,2621)----> d = 5. However, it can't resolve the challenge because it doesn't satisfy the bound. After more research, I find one paper under ""New RSA Vulnerabilities Using Lattice Reduction Methods", University of Paderborn, 2003." it talks about what I am trying to resolve. The problem is that it is too hard to understand. I am looking for a more practical paper with some examples that can help me out. any one helps me? | |
| Mar 19, 2011 at 3:29 | comment | added | SecureFish | @GregS, what is Smart, Inc doesn't matter really. The hamming weight is 3/309 bits | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 21:47 | answer | added | Accipitridae | timeline score: 12 | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 14:39 | comment | added | President James K. Polk | What is Smart, Inc? Can you provide a link? How low is the hamming weight? Without any more details than you given it is probably not possible to say. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 7:19 | comment | added | Rook | @SecureFish yeah idk man maybe you should read the textbook. Also you should put @rook if you want to contact me, otherwise i'm not going to get your message. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 7:02 | comment | added | SecureFish | yes.the first question is that the private key that is large but have a small hamming weight secure enough? | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 6:58 | comment | added | Tim Post | @Rook - It is a little complex, but I think it can be sufficiently answered here objectively. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 6:52 | comment | added | Rook | This is a complex question and its better to break it up. | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 6:51 | history | asked | SecureFish | CC BY-SA 2.5 |