XPost: alt.folklore.computers
From: robin_listas@es.invalid
On 2025-12-29 18:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 29/12/2025 14:31, Peter Flass wrote:
>> On 12/29/25 03:42, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>> Bobbie Sellers writes:
>>>> On 12/28/25 22:40, rbowman wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2025 01:17:50 -0500, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>> For most 'office' uses you do NOT need AES-256 encryption for yer
>>>>>> damned payroll or budget files. Nobody, not even Vlad or Xi, CARES.
>>>>> We were dealing with NPS sites like Yellowstone and Rocky
>>>>> Mountain. The Dept. of Interior certainly cares.
>>>>
>>>> Any employer who has a payroll has the Social Security numbers
>>>> of the employees. This certainly deserves the best encryption that
>>>> can be set up.
>>>>
>>>> The encryption schemes are all breakable with enough power
>>>> brought to bear.
>>>
>>> At this point you should take a moment to work out how much ‘enough’
is.
>>>
>>> Let’s assume that:
>>> - you have a circuit design that can do a single AES-128 key
>>> schedule and decrypt operation in one cycle
>>> - you can fit a million copies of this design onto one chip
>>> - you can run the chip at 10GHz
>>> - you can manufacture a trillion instances of the chip
>>> (and put enough of a computer around them to do something useful)
>>> - you can somehow power and cool this unrealistically large
>>> supercomputer.
>>>
>>> This lets you test 10^6 * 10^10 * 10^12 = 10^28 keys per second. There
>>> are 2^128 possible AES-128 keys so it will take you a little over one
>>> thousand years to break AES-128. Your SSN will no longer be relevant by
>>> this point.
>>
>> Right now, but people who work with this stuff are worried about what
>> quantum computers can do with it.
>>
>>
> Enigma codes were also 'unbreakable'
The maths about encryption are better understood now.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
