Topic: How did the Chinese crack SHA? (Read 92 times)

An interesting post that you link to.

Not interesting because it refines the truth, but interesting because it elaborates the mistake of trusting public key cryptography.

Your 'prime' paradigm consists of vectors, or whatever, with 24 or however many sections. That starts with an underlying understanding which precludes understanding why pkc can never be secure.

"Math" is a science, and like all academic sciences it does not reflect nature directly, but rather several steps removed. There is "something", then there is "something a person understands" etc etc etc and eventually there is a science as a group project.

So "primes" cannot be organized in a way that reflects something that is derived from them, as your post suggests. You cannot give a person an orange and say "I bought a hundred gallons of orange juice and managed to build this orange out of it".

So the initial point about pkc is that there are two competing variables.

There is "any" algorithm, then there is the product of that algorithm.

If there is a gross discrepancy such that patterns in the product of the algorithm e.g. bitcoin address, advances at a much slower pace than the complexity of the algorithms then you cannot create what people call 'secure' pkc. Because you can find patterns in the product i.e., 'bitcoin addresses' for example that are computationally inexpensive compared to the 'initial' algorithm. Maybe why ltc is computationally heavier than btc.

It doesn't seem to be a big secret, but it also is not something discussed publicly, for reasons that are probably not what most 'insiders' would be comfortable admitting.

PKC is a massive globalist fraud which is designed to profit the individuals who have power in the melting pot.

As long as they can keep the discrepancy between algorithm/product patterns hidden they can maintain control over the trillions of dollars controlled by the pkc scam.

They do this in part simply by preventing access to computers powerful enough to let people demonstrate the discrepancy in 'secure' algorithms.

Anybody can demonstrate it using simple algorithms.

~

Edit to add

Here is a crude analogy of what pkc is.

Imagine a group of guys from one tribe that stumbles on another weaker tribe and finds a vulnerability that allows them to commit crimes against the weaker tribe.

Every so often somebody figures out that it is simply an ongoing criminal enterprise, but the initial gang has had such power, for so long, that they have been able to force cognitive tricks on anybody who discovers the ruse.

So a person typically
1) Sees the vulnerable group
2) Profits from abusing them
3) Then is auto indoctrinated that the abuse is under guise of doing some good deed
4) Continues abusing and profiting while using their abilities to perpetuate the crime
etc etc

A small group of people has extracted massive benefit from weaker tribes for decades under the pkc ruse.

As things are developing it looks like the biggest profiteer, the UK, is trying to dump the bill on some of the late joiners, hence things like the spate of Pegasus exposes.

It also raises the question of ltc's origin and forces a person to ask when the Chinese realized what the Brits were doing...........and whether they then decided to join the crime spree.

China has lots of prisoners it does not want to lose, exactly as the Brits. Tibetans, Uyghurs etc.

~

edit to add 2

If your view is accurate


Then it means prime numbers are subordinate in some way to composite numbers and it would cause extreme problems among mathematics students around the world.

Maybe they use better techniques for hunting primes? 

bljatcoin is cracked already u just do not know it yet

Private keys, passwords, etc are as secured as the laws that protect them and how responsible or morally upright the owners are.
China or US can't do anything bad about the security without consequences unless the owners rights are nolonger enforceable because of doing something wrong that leaves their security vulnerable.

If you are referring to SHA-1, it was cracked many years ago (Announcing the first SHA1 collision). I haven't seen information about any others.

Why don't you start by providing the source of your information?

Word seems to be filtering out that so called 'secure hashing algorithms' are all broken, and China has joined the U.S. in the very short list of countries with the ability.

How did they do it?

Only thing known for sure is that it has to do with the fact that the complexity of patterns an algorithm produces  progresses slower than the complexity of the algorithm. So in relation to hashing algorithms that means that you can take a large number of products of the algorithm e.g. public addresses, and find the pattern fairly easily, then backtrack to the private keys.

Anybody have more info?