Timeline for Can all NP-complete cryptosystems be broken if one is broken?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://crypto.stackexchange.com/ with https://crypto.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 24, 2014 at 17:03 | comment | added | vzn | feel free to edit to your satisfaction. ... but, not sure exactly what you meant; who conjectures that modern crypto is built out of assumptions stronger than P≠NP? | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 16:08 | comment | added | Martin Berger | I suggest to be more precise and replace " equivalent or similar" by something like "similar to, but (probably) harder than". | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 16:05 | comment | added | vzn | existence of cryptographic trapdoor/one-way functions are roughly connected to the P=?NP conjecture. you omitted "or similar". the Impaggliazo ref shows the interconnections in more detail. direct connections have not been proven but havent been ruled out either. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 15:58 | comment | added | Martin Berger | I don't think much "modern crypto" is build on "assumptions equivalent [...] to P≠NP". | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 15:41 | history | answered | vzn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |