Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #83901 > unrolled thread

Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2015-10-21 23:39 +0200
    Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-10-21 14:47 -0700
      Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-21 16:42 -0600
        Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? meagain <rick0.merrill@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 15:31 -0400
          Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-27 19:47 +0000
            Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 15:47 -0600
            Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-10-28 14:49 -0700
              Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-28 22:23 +0000
                Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2015-10-29 19:56 +0100
          A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-10-27 12:50 -0700
            Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-27 21:18 +0100
              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-27 20:49 +0000
              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-27 13:53 -0700
                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-27 21:43 +0000
                  Better Randomness ? ! Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-10-27 22:41 -0700
                    Re: Better Randomness ? ! dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2015-10-28 19:41 +1100
                    Re: Better Randomness ? ! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-28 14:33 +0000
                      Re: Better Randomness ? ! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 09:36 -0500
                        Re: Better Randomness ? ! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 05:56 -0400
                      Re: Better Randomness ? ! "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:46 -0400
                      QueryPerformanceCounter() -- Better Randomness. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-10-28 08:28 -0700
                        Re: QueryPerformanceCounter() -- Better Randomness. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 11:48 -0400
                          RDRAND has numerous problems. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-10-28 09:35 -0700
                        Re: QueryPerformanceCounter() -- Better Randomness. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-28 16:17 +0000
                          QueryPerformanceCounter() -- Better Randomness. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-10-28 09:50 -0700
                      Re: Better Randomness ? ! Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2015-10-29 19:38 +0100
                        Re: Better Randomness ? ! Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-10-29 19:14 +0000
                          Re: Better Randomness ? ! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-29 13:10 -0700
                    Re: Better Randomness ? ! benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 05:45 -0400
                  Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 07:07 -0500
                    Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 17:13 -0600
                    Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-10-29 00:27 +0000
                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Big Bad Bob <BigBadBob-at-mrp3-dot-com@testing.local> - 2015-10-28 14:59 -0700
                  Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-28 22:21 +0000
                  Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 17:14 -0600
                    Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 16:29 -0700
                      Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 15:43 -0600
                      Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2015-10-29 23:36 +0100
              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. "Rice Rocketeer" <ricerocketeer@somemail.com> - 2015-10-28 11:57 +0100
            Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 15:47 -0600
              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-27 15:38 -0700
                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-10-27 22:29 -0400
                  Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 23:02 -0600
                    Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-10-28 10:19 +0000
                      Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 17:20 -0600
                        Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-10-29 18:32 +0000
                          Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-10-29 19:19 +0000
                            Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-29 20:46 -0600
                              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-10-30 09:13 +0000
                                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-30 15:58 -0600
                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 22:58 -0600
              Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-27 22:47 +0000
                Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 23:34 -0600
                  Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-10-28 19:08 +0000
                    Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 17:22 -0600
          Re: How Is the NSA Breaking So Much Crypto? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 15:46 -0600

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#84359 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

In article <lqGdnTfuoutubbLLnZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@bresnan.com>,
 GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:

> On 10/27/15 13:50, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> > GreyCloud and Rick_Merrill wrote:
> >>> Right now, the NSA in Utah is using a new quantum computer to do the job. 
> >>>  If you
> >>> hear about talk or reports about experimenting with quantum computers, 
> >>> then it has
> >>> already been done.
> >>
> >> And how many Qbits does it have??
> >
> > Without looking, I know that
> > a real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.
> 
> Then how come NSA is building one?

NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.

A general quantum computer is under development by various universities and 
companies but none is useful yet. One quantum computer is commercially available 
but it runs a single algorithm and it's efficacy is disputed.

Everything could change tomorrow, but it hasn't changed today.

-- 
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84371 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

GreyCloud: 
> > Then how come NSA is building one?

Siri Cruz:
> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.

True, if taken literally. NSA and other gov't agencies design and
invent, but government agencies are limited by law in the number of
devices that they can build; after the prototype stage manufacture has
to be turned over to the private sector. If they need a very few of a
sensitive device they may build it themselves. (Obama isn't /really/ a
socialist!) There are exceptions for certain things; NSA has a chip
fabrication facility on its campus to fabricate classified chips, but
for all I know that may be operated by a private-sector contractor as
well. To save the taxpayer money NSA buys off-the-shelf when it can.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84376 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/27/15 20:29, Davoud wrote:
> GreyCloud:
>>> Then how come NSA is building one?
>
> Siri Cruz:
>> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.
>
> True, if taken literally. NSA and other gov't agencies design and
> invent, but government agencies are limited by law in the number of
> devices that they can build; after the prototype stage manufacture has
> to be turned over to the private sector. If they need a very few of a
> sensitive device they may build it themselves. (Obama isn't /really/ a
> socialist!) There are exceptions for certain things; NSA has a chip
> fabrication facility on its campus to fabricate classified chips, but
> for all I know that may be operated by a private-sector contractor as
> well. To save the taxpayer money NSA buys off-the-shelf when it can.
>

They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available. 
Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons.  They don't 
want a vendor to know how it works.  I don't know if you have heard 
about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
Somewere on NSAs website, www.nsa.gov, there is a release program to 
corporations for advanced technology that they deem should be useful for 
public use.

Anyway, since when did the nsa ever obey the law?


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84382 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

In article <dsSdnYTJC8VJy63LnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/27/15 20:29, Davoud wrote:
> > GreyCloud:
> >>> Then how come NSA is building one?
> >
> > Siri Cruz:
> >> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.
> >
> > True, if taken literally. NSA and other gov't agencies design and
> > invent, but government agencies are limited by law in the number of
> > devices that they can build; after the prototype stage manufacture has
> > to be turned over to the private sector. If they need a very few of a
> > sensitive device they may build it themselves. (Obama isn't /really/ a
> > socialist!) There are exceptions for certain things; NSA has a chip
> > fabrication facility on its campus to fabricate classified chips, but
> > for all I know that may be operated by a private-sector contractor as
> > well. To save the taxpayer money NSA buys off-the-shelf when it can.
> >
>
> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons.  They don't
> want a vendor to know how it works.  I don't know if you have heard
> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.

I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at 
the time could barely support 10 MHZ.

Secondly a 4K RAM chip at the time was 4.25 inches and stored 
512 bytes.  Approximately 20 KB of RAM was the size of a shoe 
box.

Thirdly, there wasn't an I/O bus or storage device on the planet 
in existence at that time capable of the I/O requirements for 
such a processor.


> Somewere on NSAs website, www.nsa.gov, there is a release program to
> corporations for advanced technology that they deem should be useful for
> public use.
>
> Anyway, since when did the nsa ever obey the law?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84422 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/28/15 04:19, Anonymous wrote:
> In article<dsSdnYTJC8VJy63LnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
> GreyCloud<cumulus@mist.com>  wrote:
>>
>> On 10/27/15 20:29, Davoud wrote:
>>> GreyCloud:
>>>>> Then how come NSA is building one?
>>>
>>> Siri Cruz:
>>>> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.
>>>
>>> True, if taken literally. NSA and other gov't agencies design and
>>> invent, but government agencies are limited by law in the number of
>>> devices that they can build; after the prototype stage manufacture has
>>> to be turned over to the private sector. If they need a very few of a
>>> sensitive device they may build it themselves. (Obama isn't /really/ a
>>> socialist!) There are exceptions for certain things; NSA has a chip
>>> fabrication facility on its campus to fabricate classified chips, but
>>> for all I know that may be operated by a private-sector contractor as
>>> well. To save the taxpayer money NSA buys off-the-shelf when it can.
>>>
>>
>> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
>> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons.  They don't
>> want a vendor to know how it works.  I don't know if you have heard
>> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
>
> I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
> the time could barely support 10 MHZ.

As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial vendor.
Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz 
clock.  They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and 
heat dissipation.  The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded 
with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.
You can google the KG-13.
They don't say much about it tho.

>
> Secondly a 4K RAM chip at the time was 4.25 inches and stored
> 512 bytes.  Approximately 20 KB of RAM was the size of a shoe
> box.
>
> Thirdly, there wasn't an I/O bus or storage device on the planet
> in existence at that time capable of the I/O requirements for
> such a processor.

 From the commercial sector, no.
Again, don't think that they buy anything from the commercial sector and 
you get the idea somewhat on how they work.

>
>
>> Somewere on NSAs website, www.nsa.gov, there is a release program to
>> corporations for advanced technology that they deem should be useful for
>> public use.
>>
>> Anyway, since when did the nsa ever obey the law?
>


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84440 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

In article <2uydnb5Kc_fUxazLnZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@bresnan.com>
GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/28/15 04:19, Anonymous wrote:
> > In article<dsSdnYTJC8VJy63LnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
> > GreyCloud<cumulus@mist.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/27/15 20:29, Davoud wrote:
> >>> GreyCloud:
> >>>>> Then how come NSA is building one?
> >>>
> >>> Siri Cruz:
> >>>> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.
> >>>
> >>> True, if taken literally. NSA and other gov't agencies design and
> >>> invent, but government agencies are limited by law in the number of
> >>> devices that they can build; after the prototype stage manufacture has
> >>> to be turned over to the private sector. If they need a very few of a
> >>> sensitive device they may build it themselves. (Obama isn't /really/ a
> >>> socialist!) There are exceptions for certain things; NSA has a chip
> >>> fabrication facility on its campus to fabricate classified chips, but
> >>> for all I know that may be operated by a private-sector contractor as
> >>> well. To save the taxpayer money NSA buys off-the-shelf when it can.
> >>>
> >>
> >> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
> >> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons.  They don't
> >> want a vendor to know how it works.  I don't know if you have heard
> >> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
> >
> > I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
> > the time could barely support 10 MHZ.
>
> As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial vendor.

IBM built it for them.

> Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz
> clock.  They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and
> heat dissipation.  The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded
> with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.

There were three boards.

> You can google the KG-13.
> They don't say much about it tho.

The NSA wasn't capable of building anything back then.  They 
didn't believe in technology, viewed it with suspicion.

> >
> > Secondly a 4K RAM chip at the time was 4.25 inches and stored
> > 512 bytes.  Approximately 20 KB of RAM was the size of a shoe
> > box.
> >
> > Thirdly, there wasn't an I/O bus or storage device on the planet
> > in existence at that time capable of the I/O requirements for
> > such a processor.
>
>  From the commercial sector, no.

This piece of equipment used a serial bus card reader.

> Again, don't think that they buy anything from the commercial sector and
> you get the idea somewhat on how they work.

They buy everything from the commercial sector and have the 
firmware modified.

> >
> >
> >> Somewere on NSAs website, www.nsa.gov, there is a release program to
> >> corporations for advanced technology that they deem should be useful for
> >> public use.
> >>
> >> Anyway, since when did the nsa ever obey the law?
> >
>
>
> --
> When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
> Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
> could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
> bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84444 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

In article <18b0053ed299eb92b2a87386e890bba6@remailer.paranoici.org>,
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:

>In article <2uydnb5Kc_fUxazLnZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@bresnan.com>
>GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:

>> >> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
>> >> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons.  They don't
>> >> want a vendor to know how it works.  I don't know if you have heard
>> >> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
>> >
>> > I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
>> > the time could barely support 10 MHZ.
>>
>> As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial vendor.
>
>IBM built it for them.
>
>> Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz
>> clock.  They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and
>> heat dissipation.  The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded
>> with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.

Where do you get 25KHz from? Look up the IBM/360, to name but one.

-- 
Lady Astor: "If you were my husband I'd give you poison." Churchill: "If
you were my wife, I'd drink it."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84455 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/29/15 13:19, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <18b0053ed299eb92b2a87386e890bba6@remailer.paranoici.org>,
> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <2uydnb5Kc_fUxazLnZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@bresnan.com>
>> GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>
>>> >> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
>>> >> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons. They
>>> don't
>>> >> want a vendor to know how it works. I don't know if you have heard
>>> >> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
>>> >
>>> > I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
>>> > the time could barely support 10 MHZ.
>>>
>>> As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial vendor.
>>
>> IBM built it for them.
>>
>>> Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz
>>> clock. They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and
>>> heat dissipation. The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded
>>> with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.
>
> Where do you get 25KHz from? Look up the IBM/360, to name but one.
>
 From working with most of the old military digital computers.  A few 
years later it moved up to 250khz.  I'm not familiar with the IBM/360 in 
1965... was it around that year?


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84466 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

In article <veWdnZRG2slvRK_LnZ2dnUU7-KGdnZ2d@bresnan.com>, GreyCloud
<cumulus@mist.com> wrote:

>On 10/29/15 13:19, Tim Streater wrote:
>> In article <18b0053ed299eb92b2a87386e890bba6@remailer.paranoici.org>,
>> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <2uydnb5Kc_fUxazLnZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@bresnan.com>
>>> GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> >> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
>>>> >> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons. They
>>>> don't
>>>> >> want a vendor to know how it works. I don't know if you have heard
>>>> >> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
>>>> >
>>>> > I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
>>>> > the time could barely support 10 MHZ.
>>>>
>>>> As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial vendor.
>>>
>>> IBM built it for them.
>>>
>>>> Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz
>>>> clock. They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and
>>>> heat dissipation. The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded
>>>> with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.
>>
>> Where do you get 25KHz from? Look up the IBM/360, to name but one.
>>
> From working with most of the old military digital computers.

Thass not commercial is it.

> A few years later it moved up to 250khz.  I'm not familiar with
> the IBM/360 in 1965... was it around that year?

Yes. CDC 6600 was 10MHz, CDC 3000 Series was at least 1MHz. Even the
Leo 1 (1951) had a clock speed of 500KHz.

-- 
"A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then 
 quietly strangled." - Sir Barnett Cocks (1907-1989)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84519 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/30/15 03:13, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <veWdnZRG2slvRK_LnZ2dnUU7-KGdnZ2d@bresnan.com>, GreyCloud
> <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/15 13:19, Tim Streater wrote:
>>> In article <18b0053ed299eb92b2a87386e890bba6@remailer.paranoici.org>,
>>> Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <2uydnb5Kc_fUxazLnZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@bresnan.com>
>>>> GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> >> They fab their own chips if it isn't commercially available.
>>>>> >> Cryptograhpic chips they do themselves for security reasons. They
>>>>> don't
>>>>> >> want a vendor to know how it works. I don't know if you have heard
>>>>> >> about the 350Mhz cpu chip fabbed in 1965.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I would question that as a fairy tale since the transisters at
>>>>> > the time could barely support 10 MHZ.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've said, they fabbed their own chips, not from a commercial
>>>>> vendor.
>>>>
>>>> IBM built it for them.
>>>>
>>>>> Most of the commercial computers back then had only around a 25khz
>>>>> clock. They had solved a few manufacturing problems with cell size and
>>>>> heat dissipation. The KG-13 crypto machine had just two boards loaded
>>>>> with their own ICs that ran around 25mhz or so.
>>>
>>> Where do you get 25KHz from? Look up the IBM/360, to name but one.
>>>
>> From working with most of the old military digital computers.
>
> Thass not commercial is it.

The old Mk110 digital computer was commercial... Singer-Librascope out 
of GlenDale, CA.  Slow as all get out.

>
>> A few years later it moved up to 250khz. I'm not familiar with
>> the IBM/360 in 1965... was it around that year?
>
> Yes. CDC 6600 was 10MHz, CDC 3000 Series was at least 1MHz. Even the
> Leo 1 (1951) had a clock speed of 500KHz.
>
I think those were a bit pricey back then.  The Navy really didn't have 
much room for these, and all digital computers that they did use for 
combat purposes were fairly specialized and only programmed from the 
another on-shore computer system.  IRC, the mk110 only calculated a few 
angles to feed to an analog computer, meaning that the time and speeds 
of the torpedos were rather slow as well.  The Sperry computers were 
also commercial, but ran at a slow speed.



-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84375 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/27/15 16:38, Siri Cruz wrote:
> In article<lqGdnTfuoutubbLLnZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@bresnan.com>,
>   GreyCloud<cumulus@mist.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 10/27/15 13:50, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>>> GreyCloud and Rick_Merrill wrote:
>>>>> Right now, the NSA in Utah is using a new quantum computer to do the job.
>>>>>   If you
>>>>> hear about talk or reports about experimenting with quantum computers,
>>>>> then it has
>>>>> already been done.
>>>>
>>>> And how many Qbits does it have??
>>>
>>> Without looking, I know that
>>> a real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.
>>
>> Then how come NSA is building one?
>
> NSA doesn't. NSA buys computers rather than build them.

They still do build their own.  Back 1965 they had a running 350mhz 
computer chip that they fabbed themselves at Ft. Dietrick,MD.
Where do you get the idea that they don't build them themselves?

>
> A general quantum computer is under development by various universities and
> companies but none is useful yet. One quantum computer is commercially available
> but it runs a single algorithm and it's efficacy is disputed.
>
> Everything could change tomorrow, but it hasn't changed today.
>
Not that you know of anyway.
NSA will build their own and most likely finished the project, and they 
do it for security reasons.


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84360 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 2015-10-27, GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
> On 10/27/15 13:50, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>> GreyCloud and Rick_Merrill wrote:
>>>> Right now, the NSA in Utah is using a new quantum computer to do the job.  If you
>>>> hear about talk or reports about experimenting with quantum computers, then it has
>>>> already been done.
>>>
>>> And how many Qbits does it have??
>>
>> Without looking, I know that
>> a real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.
>
> Then how come NSA is building one?

Evidence? I believe that NSA has "purchased" a Dwave to try it out and
see if it really can do quantum computing or at least "faster than
classical" computing. They would be fools not to keep track of what is
happening. That does not mean that what is happening is worth anything. 


>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84378 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/27/15 16:47, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2015-10-27, GreyCloud<cumulus@mist.com>  wrote:
>> On 10/27/15 13:50, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>>> GreyCloud and Rick_Merrill wrote:
>>>>> Right now, the NSA in Utah is using a new quantum computer to do the job.  If you
>>>>> hear about talk or reports about experimenting with quantum computers, then it has
>>>>> already been done.
>>>>
>>>> And how many Qbits does it have??
>>>
>>> Without looking, I know that
>>> a real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.
>>
>> Then how come NSA is building one?
>
> Evidence? I believe that NSA has "purchased" a Dwave to try it out and
> see if it really can do quantum computing or at least "faster than
> classical" computing. They would be fools not to keep track of what is
> happening. That does not mean that what is happening is worth anything.
>
>
>>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/01/03/snowden_docs_show_nsa_building_encryptioncracking_quantum_system/

And others I found.

But I do know that NSA has the technology release program:
https://www.nsa.gov/research/_files/tech_transfers/nsa_technology_transfer_program.pdf

Under this program, I believe that Dwave got their technology from NSA 
and developed it further, but I'm not sure if it was still classified 
then and released under an NDA, or from an earlier catalog.

A lot of classified stuff isn't in the catalog I believe.


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84409 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 2015-10-28, GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> wrote:
> On 10/27/15 16:47, William Unruh wrote:
...
>
> But I do know that NSA has the technology release program:
> https://www.nsa.gov/research/_files/tech_transfers/nsa_technology_transfer_program.pdf
>
> Under this program, I believe that Dwave got their technology from NSA 
> and developed it further, but I'm not sure if it was still classified 

Nope. I have been watching them for the past 10 years ( they are just
down the road).

> then and released under an NDA, or from an earlier catalog.
>
> A lot of classified stuff isn't in the catalog I believe.
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84423 — Re: A real quantum computer, doing real work, doesn't exist.

On 10/28/15 13:08, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2015-10-28, GreyCloud<cumulus@mist.com>  wrote:
>> On 10/27/15 16:47, William Unruh wrote:
> ...
>>
>> But I do know that NSA has the technology release program:
>> https://www.nsa.gov/research/_files/tech_transfers/nsa_technology_transfer_program.pdf
>>
>> Under this program, I believe that Dwave got their technology from NSA
>> and developed it further, but I'm not sure if it was still classified
>
> Nope. I have been watching them for the past 10 years ( they are just
> down the road).
>

They may be just down the road, but a lot of companies do get newly 
released technology by signing an NDA.  Martin Marietta comes to mind.

>> then and released under an NDA, or from an earlier catalog.
>>
>> A lot of classified stuff isn't in the catalog I believe.
>>
>>


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84356

On 10/27/15 13:31, meagain wrote:
> GreyCloud wrote on 10/21/2015 6:42 PM:
>> On 10/21/15 15:47, Big Bad Bob wrote:
>>> On 10/21/15 14:39, Jeremy Bentham so wittily quipped:
>>>> In article<637756e68148fcbce5a733a00e35faff@hoi-polloi.org>
>>>> Anonymous<anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Via SlashDot.org
>>>>> There have been rumors for years that the NSA can decrypt a
>>>>> significant fraction of encrypted Internet traffic. In 2012, James
>>>>> Bamford published an article quoting anonymous former NSA officials
>>>>> stating that the agency had achieved a "computing breakthrough" that
>>>>> gave them "the ability to crack current public encryption." The
>>>>> Snowden documents also hint at some extraordinary capabilities: they
>>>>> show that NSA has built extensive infrastructure to intercept and
>>>>> decrypt VPN traffic and suggest that the agency can decrypt at least
>>>>> some HTTPS and SSH connections on demand.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the documents do not explain how these breakthroughs work,
>>>>> and speculation about possible backdoors or broken algorithms has been
>>>>> rampant in the technical community. Yesterday at ACM CCS, one of the
>>>>> leading security research venues, we and twelve coauthors presented a
>>>>> paper that we think solves this technical mystery.
>>>>>
>>>>> If a client and server are speaking Diffie-Hellman, they first need to
>>>>> agree on a large prime number with a particular form. There seemed to
>>>>> be no reason why everyone couldn't just use the same prime, and, in
>>>>> fact, many applications tend to use standardized or hard-coded primes.
>>>>> But there was a very important detail that got lost in translation
>>>>> between the mathematicians and the practitioners: an adversary can
>>>>> perform a single enormous computation to "crack" a particular prime,
>>>>> then easily break any individual connection that uses that prime.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://weakdh.org/imperfect-forward-secrecy-ccs15.pdf
>>>>
>>>> This is not a new problem.
>>>
>>> true, but the confirmation of NSA's capabilities might be.
>>>
>>>> To be fair, most of the exploits were the result of lazy, stupid
>>>> or incompetent programmers.
>>>
>>> not surprising.
>>>
>>>
>>> but since openssl gives you the ability to create new [reasonably
>>> secure] DH parameters, there's no excuse to re-use them, particularly
>>> for multiple clients. [same client, no problem, just issue new ones for
>>> each session or whatever]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Right now, the NSA in Utah is using a new quantum computer to do the
>> job. If you
>> hear about talk or reports about experimenting with quantum computers,
>> then it has
>> already been done.
>
> And how many Qbits does it have??
>
>
Don't know.


-- 
When told the reason for daylight savings time the Old
Indian said, "Only the government would believe that you
could cut a foot off the top of a blanket, sew it to the
bottom, and have a longer blanket."

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web