Hacker News Reader

Comment by ColinWright | Hacker News Reader

I'm fascinated by your claim:

    this can factorize any number on earth in
    acceptable amounts of time provided your
    machine stacklimit allows

You know factoring integers is thought to be a hard problem, right?

I look forward to your result of factoring RSA 1536.

I'm interested as to why you chose that rather than RSA-240, which should be much easier as it only has 795 bits as opposed to 1536 bits.

View on HN

I need volunteers to test out my code on their laptops/servers. Those interested, skype me: subhendra.basu, whatsapp: 9971304836, message me with phone number, or email me : subhendra.basu@gmail.com this is purely voluntary and there is no monetary benefit as such . but I will include the name of the person who helped me in the acknowledgements. Note that I have already open sourced my code to factorize prohibitively large integers. typical run time for a 4000 digit number might run to 24 hours. So think before volunteering.

I see no evidence at all that you've made any kind of breakthrough. Current belief in the factoring world is that the GNFS is the fastest way to factor integers - are you claiming you can do better?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_numbers#RSA-2048 :

    RSA-2048 has 617 decimal digits (2,048 bits).
    It is the largest of the RSA numbers and carried
    the largest cash prize for its factorization,
    US$200,000. The largest factored RSA number is
    768 bits long (232 decimal digits), and the
    RSA-2048 may not be factorizable for many years
    to come, unless considerable advances are made
    in integer factorization or computational power
    in the near future.

And here from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_factorization_records :

    On December 12, 2009, a team including researchers
    from the CWI, the EPFL, INRIA and NTT in addition
    to the authors of the previous record factored
    RSA-768, a 232-digit semiprime.  They used the
    equivalent of almost 2000 years of computing on
    a single core 2.2 GHz AMD Opteron.

You're saying that a 4000 digit number may take 24 hours?

I'd be interested to see at least some evidence that you're doing something better before dedicating any time to your project.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com