Can anyone tell me, what if anything is 'insecure' about the following factors except for the low bit length?


I'm not familiar enough with the subject to know and I keep getting 'weird' products that successfully return fast, intermingled with others that seem to never return a result.

  • 8
    Since the bit length is what provides securty in the first place, this is like asking whether a building is secure, apart from the lack of outer walls.

    But otherwise, check whether the conditions of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... (click "6.3. Faulty key generation" in the article, the anchored link doesn't work here) are OK.
  • 0
    How did you come up with those numbers in the first place ?
  • 0
    @dder same random generator I always use.
  • 1
    the fact that you shared them
  • 1
    @kleopi you're kinda clever. have a cookie my friend.
  • 0
    So what exactly are you trying to do ? Constant time multiplications ? RSA ?
  • 1
    @dder I'm investigating series of numbers that

    are of the form (Q+-m)/(q+-m) +- j, Q/q=√(a*b), which when rounded produce multiple instance of a and b, and/or produce instances of numbers of the form '1.0...n, such as '1.0004,' ,'1.00000618', etc, which I've managed to show are precisely derivable from exact quantities in a bunch of algebraic identities related to a big network of variables separately derived from a*b. These small values I'm calling 'quarks' and they're kinda the thin connecting glue between hundreds of identities I've found through a script designed to generate and find new ones.

    I thought maybe there might be some underlying weakness in the factors that the sequence kept hitting on, so idk at this point.
Add Comment