CRYPTOKEKS

CRYPTOKEKS
B T F O
T T
F F
O O

Attached: Screenshot_20180921-190814.png (1440x2880, 1.26M)

Other urls found in this thread:

math.stackexchange.com/questions/69540/would-a-proof-to-the-riemann-hypothesis-affect-security
schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/09/new_findings_ab.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I swear I got the formatting down on my phone

Attached: loureedsxsw.jpg (450x299, 16K)

What does this have to do with crypto? I thought all had already accounted for the riemann hypothesis being true.

just wait for quantum computers to mine out anything left over a long weekend

If he proved the hypothesis correct, say goodbye to cryptography.

>wikipedia "Riemann hypothesis"
>ctrl + F "crypto"
>0 matches
I'm sure if it was so critical it would at least appear

>google 'prime factorization riemann hypothesis'
>google 'prime factorization cryptography'
>realize how dumb you sound

math.stackexchange.com/questions/69540/would-a-proof-to-the-riemann-hypothesis-affect-security
enjoy being a retard

>"b-b-but stackoverflow said..."
kek

This is a Jow Forums tier response. Unless you can refute the answer provided in that link, don't even bother spouting your mouth off

@67730386

Attached: you_retarded.jpg (570x587, 43K)

that's not a Jow Forums tier response, it's the sort of comeback a liberal s*yboy would give

Most theorems and pretty much everything dealing with crypto already assumes rh to be true
In general you cannot say "assume x unproven theorem" in a proof, but with the RH you can

not him but it's right in the answer lol

>It is possible, however, that in the process of resolving RH, we improve our understanding of related questions/techniques and use our improved knowledge to create algorithms that do have the potential to crack RSA codes.

resolving RH isn't going just to happen magically with current techniques

No it literally is a Jow Forums response
>You're retarded
>Provides argument stating he's correct
>HURR DURR TRUSTING DAT SOURCE

did you read what you just posted? it says NOTHING about resolving RH making security weaker

There are tons of books that explore what would happen if the Riemann hypothesis was true. None of them derived a polynomial algorithm for prime factorization.

it means it depends on HOW it is resolved. it's all hypothetical at this point so why argue

>ejectfromcockpit.jpg

This is definitely a post a dumb liberal s*yboy would make

Calling other people sóyboys is projection at its finest

>*takes fat rip*
>"coughs up smoke*
>*sucks in air through teeth*
"ey...what if... P _does'nt_ equal NP"

Let's be real here for a second then. If he was going to make security weaker he would have died far before making any of this public.

el teléfono...

Attached: 1510618994733.png (497x480, 22K)

What does the riemann hypothesis have to do with crypto? If it's true, some relevant results from calculus become theorems, but it has fuck all to do with crypto, which is discrete maths.

This literally implies "it depends on what the proof says"
Since the proof is supposedly "simple", it is likely that it may be "simple" to beat cryptography.

Jow Forums and s*y are the same, they are just on the two opposite ends of a made up spectrum.

The Riemann hypothesis has nothing to do with crypto.

nice bait thread, posting two unrelated things together, very clever

Simple as in simple to understand not to compute.

>New Scientist contacted a number of mathematicians to comment on the claimed proof, but all of them declined. Atiyah has produced a number of papers in recent years making remarkable claims which have so far failed to convince his peers.

Okay.

>so far failed to convince his peers.
that is not an indication, most famous example is radio pulsars nobody believed in
paper has to go very wide to be actually disproved

This is great news!

Attached: 1529560497627.png (1313x1398, 841K)

Nah, this is not n=np

Unironically neck yourself.

This isn't P=NP faggots.

I don't understand any of this even when I read the Wiki on it. I was always shit at math.

>riemann hypothesis
literally what?

You are thinking about P vs NP user.

Nigga, the Riemann hypothesis is hardly related to concepts used in encryption, let alone being able to easily break encryption.

Literally me.

Just watch the nuberphile video on it, I remember liking it in uni.

Cryptanalytic attacks don't suddenly materialize upon proving RH. Those attacks can already be explored simply by assuming RH is true. A proof of RH yields no further information for the attacks.

goodbye cryptography

this

I can't decide whether I want his proof to be legit.

If it's a legit proof, it's inspiring to those who don't want Hardy to be right in claiming that math is only a young person's game (in recent memory, Wiles and Perelman killed it outside their youth, but this dude takes the piss as a fossil).

If it's not a legit proof, it leaves open the possibility that some Will Hunting-tier janitor proves it and embarrasses the shit out of academia. Even better if he's also a Scientologist, penis-pill pusher, roid head, or something like that.

how would he if no one knows what he found?
he probably used pen and paper instead of botnet ridden computers.

Atiyah's mind is rotting away but since he is a Field's medalist nobody has enough guts to call him out. Even worse, people keep inviting him to hold talks. For example his ICM2018 lecture was pretty sad, I think it might be online somewhere.

The announcement of the talk had references to three papers which had pretty much nothing to do with the topic, and Atiyah has never done any work on analytic number theory. The "proof" will contain some embarrassing mistake and everyone will try as much as they can to forget about the matter, mark my words.

could it be that something in his discovery helps with attacks?

poor Atiyah...

Attached: 1512693879887.jpg (480x602, 77K)

Israeli Gilead Amit is probably trying to talk-up Arab Michael Atiyah to draw more attention to his mistake.

Attached: the jews did this.gif (500x275, 763K)

>Negating primes is all you need to break crypto
Ok

Attached: 20130426[1].gif (612x1673, 176K)

>@
Never saw a newfag trying to fit in so hard yet failing.

It's conceivable that a proof of RH may offer something to cryptanalysts in ways that RH itself wouldn't, but it's not guaranteed.

depending on the tools used for the proof it could very well fuck up everything.

Just imagine trying to discuss math-related topic on a board filled with high school dropouts and cs students.

******.ru

>Mathematician solves Riemann Hypothesis in this one little trick! Doctors are stunned! (It really works!)

he got the call

Oh the irony

wow its literally nothing
schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/09/new_findings_ab.html

First, that is not the same thing that was announced.
Second, the solution announced could very well facilitate or even make trivial the factorization problem then crypto will be in deep shit for a while.

calls someone a moron, fucks up the link.....

Attached: s6eggv2.jpg (343x960, 35K)

r8 how gr8, scale of 2

@67736779
no u's for u, egghead

This, ITT are a bunch of drama queens

@67736779#
Jokes on you, Jow Forums pre-2018 didn't have backlinks :)

weckom ro redd*t bls upboat

Holy newfags gtfo

/thread
still, this is bad news cuz cia niggercattle will eventually get access to my anime collection if this is true.

I sure hope so, user.

Crypto uses private and public keys. Public keys rely on the product of two primes. These two primes are kept secret. Anyone who knows the 2 primes can withdraw money from the account.

If a mathematical way to deduce the two primes from a prime were to be created, it would mean people would be unable to prevent anyone from withdrawing from your account. Right now the only way is to brute force it, but there are way too many primes to possibly guess that before the sun dies.

You mean deduce the two primes from a composite.
But knowing the RH is true doesn't help you factor primes out of a composite faster. Mathematicians have been writing papers with "assuming RH is true..." for decades, and none of those papers has a way to factor big numbers quickly. If they did, the algorithm would have worked. They wouldn't be able to prove it worked for all inputs yet, but it would have.

>just wait for quantum computers to mine out anything left over a long weekend
Quantum computing isn't magic.
Hash-based PoW's are virtually not impacted by QC