Adapted my primality test algorithm to do a check for if a number is a "Perfect Number" (the sum of all its dividends equals the number itself). This one was fun and turned out to be super fast as well. It was written in Haskell.
@freemo Another cool feature I found is how to quickly find prime numbers for RSA.
@LWFlouisa Yea we have a lot of really cool probabilistic methods for finding large primes. Did you discover a new novel way or just read about an existing one?
@LWFlouisa I agree they do a very poor job at teaching math. Common core in america is a step in the right direction at least but still has its flaws
@freemo So something that has a positive charge will always be followed by a negative charge. 9 is always positive, and 3 and 6 are always negatively charged.
@freemo I think I have a preview somewhere, I'll look for it.
Heere we go: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bky-LSSgtY8/?taken-by=sarahrweaver
It's still theoretical at this point. But has worked in my experiments.
@LWFlouisa cool :)
@freemo But the theory goes that using this method, you can skip primes that aren't perfect.
@LWFlouisa All primes are perfect to me :)
@freemo What a 59 * 53 example!
@freemo Yea I prefer the term compatible primes: 59 and 53; 197 and 193, and so on work better than say 3 * 197.
@freemo The compatibility allows you to generate mathematically related co-primes more easily where phin * phin + 1 mod phin is equal to 1.
@freemo My guess is this is why people are wanting to move toward other methods besides being hard to compute.
@LWFlouisa Well hard to compute isnt guaranteed to always be hard to compute. Most cryptography today will be useful against a Quantum Computer.
@freemo Especially symmetric systems.
Its one reason I focus on information splitting/dispersal over key exchange.
In the asymmetric solitaire modification, randomness is useful in finding a chain of small primes that can be used for key exchange.
Such as in using a different public key to shift each different portion of a symmetric key.
@freemo With traditional asymmetric, you'd still prone to chosen plaintext, although I'd probably need to ask Bruce Schneier what that means exactly. His book wasn't real clear about this.
@freemo In this context, because of the nature of the vortex as a viable one way function: p (or 6) and q (or 3) must be chosen such that 8 and 5 are easy not find a quantum computer to find, so much play the fact that primes are easy to find against itself.
@freemo To make the vortex a viable one way function I mean.
@LWFlouisa Anything based on primes at all will fail against a QC.
@freemo Yea it will be interesting to see how QC will effect cryptography.
Not sure if it's as strong against steganography. Maybe?
@LWFlouisa There are QC resistant cryptographic algorithms that can run on conventional computers. None of them however rely on the difficulty to verify prime numbers however.
@freemo Code Based lAttice is an example, I think. Not sure.
@freemo I guess that's why key exchange is so hard though. One of my ideas was hiding an encrypted key in plain sight.
@LWFlouisa Hard how? We have "Perfect forward Security" which allows for key exchange with some rather nice security guarantees.
@freemo Oh security wise very easy. I'm thinking more in keeping the encrypted key from being discovered.
@freemo Namely, keeping the public key public, while keeping the ciphertext hidden in plain sight.
@LWFlouisa A symetric encryption across your private key accomplishes just that
@freemo I may have to look into that.
@freemo Mainly i want the hiding in plaint sight incorporated into the encryption program itself.
@freemo Situational, but if one doesn't have time to embed and image and encrypt a key separately, such as in high risk time constraints.
@freemo Ex. After I encrypt plaintext 8, I take the ciphertext and embed it into an image using steghide.
@freemo One thing I'm plugging into this algorithm: when you multiple 59 and 53 you get 3127, with a phi of 3016. Normally candidates are based on adding phi + 1. In mine the candidates are found by phi * 2 +1 or -1 depending on the point on a vortex chart.