Topic: Researcher Claims to Crack RSA-2048 With Quantum Computer - page 4. (Read 1313 times)

i wasn't talking about the 10^1000 number. i was just talking about 2048-bit integers. big difference. 2048-bit numbers are still pretty big but they're only about 600 base 10 digits. that's it! plenty of room to store it on a computer and do alot of calculations on it.

they might not factor 10^1000 size numbers but 2048 bit numbers are an entirely different animal and should be vulnerable to quantum computers at some point. very vulnerable. the only question is, when do companies like atom computing scale up past 1000 qbits to say 1 million qbits. i'd say in the next 10 years at worst.
they went from 100 qbits to 1000 in like 2 years.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/10/atom-computing-is-the-first-to-announce-a-1000-qubit-quantum-computer/
For Atom itself, the step up from 100 to 1,000 qubits was done without significantly increasing the laser power required. That will make it easier to keep boosting the qubit count. And, Bloom adds, "We think that the amount of challenge we had to face to go from 100 to 1,000 is probably significantly higher than the amount of challenges we're gonna face when going to whatever we want to go to next—10,000, 100,000

That challenge ended in 2007. I guess RSA started getting worried they might have to pay out on some of the larger cash prizes like the $100k prize for RSA-1024....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_Factoring_Challenge

If you could crack RSA-2048 there are several very well known public challenges that you could break (one of which has a $200k prize, IIRC).  Anyone who claims to be able to crack RSA and doesn't prove it should just be disregarded.  It's not even worth reading the rest of their claims without the proof.

If they were instead saying they could reduce it to 2^80 work through some mathematical breakthrough, making it vulnerable but not *easily* cracked that would be another matter... but these posts talk about cracking it on a cell phone.

Looking at this I don't think the source is a scammer, but his posts are clearly nonsense.  We all need to keep in mind that *everyone* is online today.  Children, scammers, smart people, dumb people, trolls, and people who are delusional too and the lines between the classes aren't always crisp.

In the days before the internet with smaller communities, you'd learn what people tend to be unreliable sources of information.  But now everyone you hear from is a stranger, and you usually don't know what weight to give their claims.

Ironically the specific nonsense here-- path tracing quantum computation running efficiently on a classical computer is strikingly similar to VB's old quantum miner scam.  In that case it was much more clearly a scam rather than someone who is confused.

The claim of RSA-2048 breaking with commercial phone has reminded me the declaration  on achievement of the cold nuclear fusion published, back in the past,  in  one  of the reputable scientific journals.

Guess what happened next. Right, it was proved that authors of that paper fell into illusion.

Both cases have in common their tendency towards wishful thinking.

Not even close to that time-frame. As @o_e_l_e_o  pointed out that is an insane amount of data.
This is the same as the magic carburetor that allowed you to get 200 miles to a gallon of gas in your 2 ton truck, it just can't be done.

Things like this will keep coming up again and again and yet it never seems to happen. Nor will it.

-Dave

Here's a number with more than 10¹⁰⁰⁰ decimal digits:

10¹⁰¹⁰⁰⁰

And here's its factorization:

2¹⁰¹⁰⁰⁰ * 5¹⁰¹⁰⁰⁰

My capital cost was not even $1

Wait wait wait. I'm just reading this in a bit more depth.


Because the formatting is messed up I originally read that as 101000, but it's actually 10¹⁰⁰⁰. There is not enough computing power in the entire world to even store a number with 10¹⁰⁰⁰ digits, let alone even think about beginning to attempt to factorize it. In fact, much like Graham's number, even if every digit of such a number was stored in a single Planck volume, the entire universe would be too small to represent such a number. But this man has factorized such a number on a mobile phone? Lol.

All our computations were done in a commercial cellphone, or a commercial Linux desktop, as our QC devices -- opening the user market to many industries. No cryogenics or special materials were used. A post-quantum, HIPAA compliant, end-to-end, patent-free, export-free, secure online solution, is being created, based on ZSentry as used from 2004 to 2014, to replace RSA.



the first part doesn't even sound believable to anyone that know about the difficulty of factoring. the second part sounds like someone that had a little too much to drink.

well i guess this was a false alarm. but at some point in the future, we should expect to see a story with this exact title where they actually provide the factorization. and i wouldn't be surprised if it was in the next 5 years. but it could be 10.  

and yeah, this guy gives off Craig Wright vibes. for sure.

Yeah, it's just another scammer looking to scam.
But, I'm sure some people will follow him and buy the 'non crack-able device' that he will be selling soon.
Or the magic security box that will not allow for this to happen to YOU.

Not worth thinking about since there are better scammers then this out there.

-Dave

Since we're in Bitcoin forum, IMO phrase "Don't trust, verify" is appropriate for claim of that researcher.


And based on what i found, it looks like that researcher currently or used to be owner or that publication. This is what i did,
1. Read news mentioned by OP which mention https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373516233_QC_Algorithms_Faster_Calculation_of_Prime_Numbers.
2. Research Gate says that researcher is part of "Planalto Research".
3. From DuckDuckGo search result, i found this LinkedIn page for "Planalto Research" which can be seen at https://www.linkedin.com/company/planalto-research.
4. That LinkedIn page mention http://gerck.com .
5. I can't access http://gerck.com , but archived page on archive.org show this,


So i agree it's like CSW again. CMIIW.

Says it all really.

This sounds like CSW all over again. Ask for a signed message as proof, which would be trivially easy to provide if any of the claims were true, and instead be told that we have to wait for some paper or evidence to be published which will "totally prove it".

I won't be holding my breath.

Current cellphones and desktops can't do quantum computing, so dude's full of ****

You mean the day when someone claims they may theoretically crack a cryptography algorithm? That day came thousands of years ago when the concept of cryptography was introduced.

Doesn't look like he actually did it:


I mean, if anybody can demonstratively use this method to break RSA-2048 on my Elitebook 6930p, I will be amazed. But it won't happen.

https://www.bankinfosecurity.com/blogs/researcher-claims-to-crack-rsa-2048-quantum-computer-p-3536
As Ed Gerck Readies Research Paper, Security Experts Say They Want to See Proof

 We all knew this day was coming sooner or later but I guess we didn't realize it would be done without shors algorithm  
 Bitcoin should still be good since it doesn't require factoring large numbers