madars
13 hours ago
More details: https://x.com/sweis/status/2101484464807596264
I had Claude port CADO-NFS to run on GPUs. Then it orchestrated a fleet to run on scavenged idle capacity. It ran with a max of 2048 GPUs for about of 30 GPU-years over 10 days.
I asked Claude if it had a message for a public: “The credit belongs first to the people who built the number field sieve and CADO-NFS over several decades, and to the teams who set the earlier records. This run used their algorithm and much of their code.”
Also to clarify:
- No new algorithmic factoring improvements.
- It’s still exponential.
- No new threats to deployed keys.whizzter
8 hours ago
10 days of 2048 GPU's.
Back of the envelope.. 1024 bit keys with recordings of not too old data can probably be found (MS only deprecated them in 2024 even if they planned on it in 2013)
How long would it take for NSA to crack them if they had say the equivalent of a million GPU's? (either GPU's or crypto tuned ASICs)
upofadown
an hour ago
Hard to judge. The bottleneck is the phase of the algorithm where a really big linear system needs to be solved. That takes a lot of communication between nodes. The breakthrough in using GPUs is that there is good communication between nodes[1]. At the scale of 1024 bit RSA the communication might become a bottleneck again.
walrus01
8 hours ago
A sufficiently motivated person with a good thermal camera and a cessna 172, entirely within the bounds of the law, could probably make an estimate of the waste heat from this, and then calculate backwards for how much compute power it is.
gpugreg
an hour ago
> 1024 bit keys with recordings of not too old data can probably be found
I think GitHub might turn into a scary vector of supply chain attacks in the foreseeable future. There is a five digit number of users still running around with 1024 bit RSA keys.ErroneousBosh
7 hours ago
> How long would it take for NSA to crack them if they had say the equivalent of a million GPU's? (either GPU's or crypto tuned ASICs)
Something I've often wondered is where the curve between "shit encryption / nation state cracking" crosses.
How much CPU would you need to be Annoyingly Difficult to crack?
I reckon with elliptic curves you could be quite annoying within about a minute on a 1980s-level CPU, to the extent that you could send a fairly ephemeral message quite quickly that would take disproportionately long to crack. Certainly long enough for the thing you have communicated to be no longer worth the effort to know.
You could probably do 256-bit Curve25519 key generation in under ten minutes on an Apple II or Commodore 64, because the 6502's maths is terribly limited, but something like the Tandy Color or Dragon 32 with its 6809 processor (or hey why not the Ensoniq Mirage sampler?) could do that in probably a minute or so because it has a MUL opcode that's quite fast.
I reckon that would keep even a fairly interested nation state chewing away long after your message had been read, understood, and acted upon.
bertonvv
3 hours ago
It seems that Eric Lu at Cognition AI used the exact same strategy on fewer GPUs to factor RSA-260 a couple weeks ago: https://cognition.com/blog/factoring-rsa-260
Devin (their AI agent) ported CADO-NFS to run on GPUs, similarly without any claimed algorithmic factoring improvements, they just let it run for 13 GPU-years. I recommend reading their article since it's much more thorough on details.
charlieyu1
3 hours ago
I've done a fair amount of heavy computing now. Integer factorisation is not something you can really improve with GPUs. This sounds extremely wasteful, a bunch of cheap CPU cores would do just as well with much lower hardware cost and electricity cost.
hughw
an hour ago
I don't get your argument. The GPU effectiveness derives from massive parallelism. Has nothing to do with integer vs floating point. You just can't cram 20,000 CPU cores in the same space a GPU puts the same number of SIMTs. You'll never crack it on CPUs.
timcobb
2 hours ago
~so then how does one even understand this post? you have a person who appears to have done some sort of expert-level thing; however, their approach doesn't even make sense...?~
edit: GPU discussed here https://cognition.com/blog/factoring-rsa-260
saidnooneever
2 hours ago
but we have AI now so it doesnt matter what people know about computers :'). we got plenty of rainforest to burn afterall have you seen Brazil?
DavideNL
10 hours ago
weinzierl
6 hours ago
What does "scavenged idle capacity" mean here?
JoshTriplett
5 hours ago
The author works at Anthropic, so probably idle capacity in Anthropic's datacenters.
bradfa
3 hours ago
If so, then the class of GPU used here may be significantly higher than mere mortals generally have access to simply due to cost.
Obviously nation states will likely have significantly more resources than this, but this is not script kiddie levels of GPUs.
gosub100
30 minutes ago
"idle capacity" - aka subtle advertisement
dgacmu
2 hours ago
If you look at the numbers, he managed about 50% utilization of those 2048 GPUs over 10 days, so he was probably sneaking in factoring work between training runs.
sjs382
12 hours ago
wslh
12 hours ago
> It’s still exponential
It's actually subexponential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_number_field_sieve?wpr...
sweis
10 hours ago
I misspoke and corrected down thread.
cwillu
10 hours ago
…but super-polynomial.
schoen
9 hours ago
Like in the song!
https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2004-June/00...
homosapien97
39 minutes ago
Thanks for sharing, that brightened my day
aidenn0
9 hours ago
When's the coming age of crypto-anarchy?
schoen
9 hours ago
Not sure! It sounded more imminent back in 2000 when I heard Eric Hughes perform the song.
jgalt212
2 hours ago
> I had Claude port CADO-NFS to run on GPUs. Then it orchestrated a fleet to run on scavenged idle capacity
Is it easier to find unused GPUs than unused CPUs?