Kindly comments on Open Thread, November 16–30, 2012 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: VincentYu 18 November 2012 01:59PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (213)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kindly 19 November 2012 11:01:15PM 4 points [-]

It wouldn't really break RSA or other algorithms, it would just push the security parameters on everything way up until you can't verify the solutions in <1 second. In particular, encoding a single code word would always require at least 1 second of time, so cryptographic algorithms would become slow.

If I were a jerk, I could publish a prime number as my RSA public key. Then anyone who tries to use stable time loops to find my private key would find themselves or their computers disrupted by bizarre coincidences (and as you've mentioned, those coincidences probably aren't a good thing for the most part).

Comment author: faul_sname 20 November 2012 12:43:14AM 1 point [-]

If I were a jerk, I could publish a prime number as my RSA public key.

Ooh, that's evil. I like that.

Comment author: Kindly 20 November 2012 02:06:41AM 0 points [-]

Well, this particular method can be defeated by running a primality tester first. Still, it's important that the problem you're solving in this method has a solution (or a short proof of lack of a solution) which I think restricts us to problems in the intersection of NP and co-NP.