lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 05:01:17 -0500
From: denis bider <>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] How to: A super-efficient cryptographic accumulator?

It seems to me the term "fractal compression" used in this thread might not
be the same thing as "fractal compression" discussed in this Wikipedia

The version of "fractal compression" discussed in the article is not
theoretical - it actually works and delivers superior quality at high
compression ratios, but at a significant computational expense.

Is this the concept you refer to with "fractal compression", or do you mean
a different kind?

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:50 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <>

> --------
> In message <CADPMZDBja=y1cUy+YPN4CYf6kOL_zRg=hou06BsANYAJVO66vA@...l.
>>, denis bider writ
> es:
> >But are we certain that there is no more efficient construction?
> That's the entire crux of the fractal compression canard:
> Yes, there *might* be such a function, we don't know, and we don't
> even know the proability of it.
> What we do know is that the only way to find it, should it exist,
> is bruteforcing a space vastly larger than the number of elementary
> particles in the universe.
> Or, as somebody summarized it: "Yes, miracles happen, but don't count on
> it."
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@...eBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists