Draft
Conversation
Author
|
I'm basically looking for feedback regarding the 4 open todos. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes #12
Please also note there is:
https://github.com/RsaCtfTool/RsaCtfTool/blob/master/lib/fdb.py
I did not use or reference this, because its license might not be compatible with the MIT license of this project. And I also thought it might be faster to just write the code than reading licensing rules.
Tests
While trying to crack RSA keys, I often noticed even small numbers not being solved.
I think they could make for good tests.
I decided on 1024 because it used to be a commonly used RSA size.
Atfirst I used 2048, but it had some performance issues with generating the keys.
Todo
pycryptodomerequirement for development.submit_factorsas static member, normal member or standalone function?