Quote from: 247poker on November 27, 2014, 08:52:24 PM

So are you NSA Vessko? haha

LOL, no. In fact, I would probably be explicitly forbidden from working for the NSA.

Quote

From what I've read, Snowden docs proved the NSA hacked ECC with bad seed keys and NiST their government Org distributed them

Please provide a link that is the source of your claims, so that I can point out exactly what you have misread. Snowden never claimed that "the NSA hacked ECC". The "NIST distributed bad seed keys" nonsense, if redacted to say "NIST suggests elliptic curves known by the NSA to be weak" would make more sense - but that doesn't mean that ECC is broken; it only means that the particular curves suggested by NIST are not good. (And even that is probably stretching it to the conspiracy theory side. The way NIST selected the actual curves is a pretty transparent process.) But, as I have repeated several times, nobody forces you to use them.

The only thing we know for sure from the Snowden leaks is that the Dual Elliptic Curve Deterministic Random Bit Generation has been included as a NIST standard due to the influence of the NSA. That's it. The only thing we know for sure. Everything else is clueless suspicions and ignorant conspiracy theories by mathematically illiterate people.

For a more informed discussion of the issue, see here.

Quote

How about this, do you agree that the 30 Mod prime algorithm locates all primes over 5 in that they exist on 8 spirals?

No, I do not - but only because your statement is clueless and imprecise. The correct statement is that all primes larger than 29 are generated (along with many more composites) by the 8 "Adoni" polynomials. (The first 10 primes - i.e., 2 to 29 inclusive - are "hard-coded") So what? They (well, all primes larger than 3) are also generated by these two polynomials:

6 * k - 1
6 * k + 1

It is possible to pick an infinite number of sets of polynomials that generate all prime numbers above a given lower limit.

Quote

Now IF you agree that is a fact, that means all primes above 5 must be 30n+P where n = any number and P = one of the 8 Adoni Prime spirals.

Wrong again. That's true only for all primes above 29 - not for all primes above 5. To save the readers the effort to search what the Adoni polynomials actually are, they are this set:

30 * k + 1
30 * k + 7
30 * k + 11
30 * k + 13
30 * k + 17
30 * k + 19
30 * k + 23
30 * k + 29

where k is a natural (i.e., non-negative integer) number. It should be blindingly obvious even to the mathematically illiterate that they can never generate any prime numbers under 31.

Quote

Now that means PRIMES ARE NOT RANDOM

Of course primes aren't random - but I am 100% percent certain that you have no clue what "random" means. There is even a formula for the approximate number of primes smaller than a limit N. The formula is not exact, it gives only an upper and lower limit. The typesetting capabilities of this forum do not allow me to reproduce it here and the person I am replying to won't understand it anyway but for those of the readers who are mathematically inclined, see this article (warning, heavy math inside).

Quote

so the long history of mathematics had man geniuses looking for that and Dr. Adoni was the first guy to find it in 1995.

No, Dr. Adoni is an ignorant moron why is imagining to have discovered the secrets of the Universe by improving the sieve of Eratosthenes in a minuscule way (by saving it the need to sieve out the first 10 primes). And, what do you know, he even claims to predict earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes. I kid you not.

Quote

Now to you is he a genius or should he be mocked on this forum like you are doing.

Mocked, definitely. Oh, wait, was that a rhetorical question?

Quote

Face it, if you mock Dr. Adoni and his brilliant 30Mod Prime Algorithm the NSA is paying you to mock him.

I wish they were. Not for the money but because the NSA employs some of the most brilliant mathematicians in the world. I wish I were that good. Sadly, I'm not.

Quote

So who signs your checks Vessko? NSA right?

Actually, at the moment it is the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and they aren't checks (we don't use those in our country).

Quote

As to bitcoin, do you agree bitcoin uses ECC crypto?

No, I do not. Again, that's because my penchant for precise statements, which the above isn't. I can only agree that Bitcoin uses the secp256k1 elliptic curve for signatures. It also uses no encryption and it uses the SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160 functions for hashing. Note that NIST actually suggests the use of secp256r1 - not of secp256k1. Conspiracy theory time - did Satoshi know something about what the NSA did way back in 2009?

Quote

Do you agree bitcoin use Koblitz Curves a form of ECC crypt?

No, I do not. Again, because of the lack of precision in the above statement. Koblitz is one of the authors of Elliptic Curve Cryptography. ECC makes use of possibly infinite number of elliptic curves for encryption and signing. One particular such curve is used for signing only in Bitcoin. That is the precise statement I can agree with.

Quote

So any major news about how corrupt ECC crypto CONCERNS BITCOIN

Indeed it does, to a certain degree (e.g., the security of transactions but not the mining), but there haven't been any.