Discrete Logarithm Problem Partly Solved -- Time To Drop Some Crypto Methods?

An anonymous reader points out this Science Daily report: "Researchers ... have solved one aspect of the discrete logarithm problem. This is considered to be one of the 'holy grails' of algorithmic number theory, on which the security of many cryptographic systems used today is based. They have devised a new algorithm that calls into question the security of one variant of this problem, which has been closely studied since 1976. The result ... discredits several cryptographic systems that until now were assumed to provide sufficient security safeguards. Although this work is still theoretical, it is likely to have repercussions especially on the cryptographic applications of smart cards, RFID chips , etc."

Re:Is Diffie Hellman at risk?

[LordLimecat]

Seeing it on slashdot means nothing. Wait till a reputable source that DOESNT have a habit of blowing everything up into a crisis reports on this-- schneier's blog would be a good place to start.

Don't put Dlog to sleep so soon

[iceco2]

The result is on for fields with small characteristic, but the most commonly used finite fields in this context are the Zp for some prime p which have characteristic p.
So though this is a very interesting result, I am not tossing out all my crypto suit yet.
we should be cautiously seeking better alternatives, but the worst thing we can do is to panic and ditch well studied algorithms and implementations every time some progress is made on their cryptanalysis.

Re:Probably known already

[marcello_dl]

There are many other methods to send info, one time pads (number stations), steganography (lots of side channels for noise to be tampered with), couriers, stuff...

And BTW you still have to prove that NSA and all the other agencies are working for their own nation against the other nations. It may hold true at lower levels, but they don't answer to anyone by design, and it's apparent that we live in a global system where politics are a diversion.

Re:Probably known already

[vadim_t]

No, like the [Dual EC DRBG](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_EC_DRBG) controversy.

I love it how people (shills?) keep bringing up DES S-boxes, as if they had anything to do with anything. The thing with DES was in 1975. Almost 40 years ago. Since then the NSA went through 10 directors, and the US through 8 presidents. And most of the staff in high positions died or retired.

It's ridiculous to try to pretend that something nice a completely different NSA did 40 years ago has the slightest relevance to today's completely different environment and politics.

Re:It's still NP.

[ShadowRangerRIT]

That's not how big-O notation [wikipedia.org] works. O() is not a function, you can't just rearrange the components. There isn't even a constant factor involved in either version of what you wrote. Who modded this informative?