logoalt Hacker News

Animats • today at 3:20 AM • 2 replies • view on HN

There are hard problems where the worst case may be exponentially hard, but the average case is much faster. Linear programming and the traveling salesman problem are like that. The faster approaches are considered "probabilistic solutions".

In cryptography, most of the problems believed to be exponentially hard, such as factoring, don't have proofs of an exponential lower bound. There's some risk of a breakthrough that makes those problems easier. A probabilistic solution would be good enough to break many cryptosystems.

I suspect that people at the cryptanalysis agencies worldwide are staying up late tonight, trying to figure out the impacts and risks of this new result.


Replies

svat • today at 4:12 AM

Incidentally, Ryan Williams says (https://x.com/rrwilliams/status/2114891838377320784):

> In fact, one of the first things I wanted OpenAI to check is that no existing cryptosystems are compromised by the result. Apparently they are safe...

so if you trust his trust of OpenAI, then this has no (immediately obvious) bearing on cryptosystems for now.

➕ show 2 replies
FlyingCanoe • today at 4:51 AM

For linear programing, the interior point method has a polynomial worst case.

It also not probabilistic, so linear programing is not rely a good example