Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 09:44:58 PM

Quote from: mcdouglasx on Today at 08:54:42 PM

You show that you do not know how this DB works(That's why I call you ignorant).

If you give a monkey infinite time typing randomly, at some point it will discover all the existing keys.
So this is not about strength and birthday paradoxes, this is beyond what kangaroo can do today.

I don't need to care how it works, but you fail to understand my question: does it help find a ECDLP solution faster than the sqrt bound?

It has zero relevance that you can store lots and lots of keys, if at the end of the day it only works based on EC scalar multiplications. I hope you do realize that Kangaroo requires only a small fixed amount of multiplications, that is, simply the number of kangaroos for initial setup, and everything else is simple additions, which are hundreds/thousands of times faster than a point multiply? And it can solve a key, on average, in around 1.71 sqrt(N) operations (by operation, I mean addition, not multiplication)? Which is a lot less than what BSGS requires? It has zero squat relevance how well you optimize the storage, because the first thing that matters is how many EC operations are performed, not how many trillions of keys you can scan as visited or not. Because first, those trillion keys need to be computed one way or the other

It's like drawing on a sheet some mountains and saying - here's the world's mountains, but you actually need to climb them, not looking at a pretty picture. These are totally separate levels of magnitude we are talking about. But anyway, you answered my question. Which is a no. Case closed.

You lack long-term vision, I assure you that BSGS with a sufficiently large database in the future, would double your current speed with Kangaroo, and to surpass it you would have to double your computing power, on the contrary BSGS would only have to store more keys, this is the interesting point of this research, which is not limited to how much computing power you have, and I'm not saying that Kangaroo is not efficient, I'm just saying that it depends on the net computing power, which is already beginning to be seen as a stone in the shoe.