Hacker Newsnew | comments | ask | jobs | submit | rbchv's commentslogin

I developed the Electrician Calculator Pro, a National Electrical Code compliant calculator for engineers, electricians, lighting designers, etc:

http://www.electriciancalculator.com

I first created the Android version about 3 years ago, then the iOS version about 1 year ago. It currently makes just enough to cover some bills, although I believe it has a greater potential. I'm currently looking for ways to make this a recurring revenue stream instead of a one time payment gig.

-----


http://helloimnadia.com/post/68175306402/how-to-ensure-finan...

The above article seems like a good point of view. Basically achieving the top 1% is an ideal that's sold to us but very very unlikely to become reality. A much better approach would be to find contentment in what you're doing.

-----


Wow that seems like a lot for angel funding. Even 20% seems like a lot for an angel round.

-----

rbchv 154 days ago | link | parent | on: Scroogled Keep Calm Mug

They're not stealing my data. I gladly give it to them.

-----


I can do the reminders part with my Google calendar. I can specify when to remind me (say 1 week before and 1 day before) and how (email, sms).

-----


This isn't passive.

-----


This is why it's a bad idea to be a technical cofounder for something you're not passionate about. It will most likely fail, and you'll be out of a ton of programming hours with nothing to show. At least if you're being paid you can go home with a paycheck each month.

-----


Or Chuck Norris

-----


I know the fundamental idea behind PGP and related technologies. My question is, if bumping his key from 2048 to 4096 bits will keep him safe until around the year 2020 (as stated by a previous reader, and from keylength.com), why not just use a 8192 bit key, or 16384 bit key and be safe for virtually your lifetime?

Does the computing cost to encrypt/decrypt make this impractical?

-----

joeyh 223 days ago | link

4096 is the largest key size gpg offers today. It was the largest key size gpg offered in 2009, which is why that's the key size I'm using now. In 1996 the largest key size pgp supported was probably 768 , which is why my first pgp key is that size. I know for sure that in 1999, the largest key I could manage to make was 2048. Looking back at those older keys, I would prefer if I could have chosen larger key sizes for them. So I suspect that in 10 years I will wish I could have used a 8196 or larger key today..

I suspect that gpg partly doesn't offer insanely large key sizes because then people like me will naively use them even if we don't need them. And perhaps partly because dealing with the math for such large numbers is harder to implement. I'd rather it offered much larger keys even if they came with warnings that it might make operations slow.

-----

joeyh 223 days ago | link

Seems that if you're really paranoid, gpg --gen-key --batch with an approptiate batch file can make 8192 or larger keys. Currently trying to generate a 81920 bit key, for general giggles and to increase my NSA rating.

-----

moep 223 days ago | link

Could you provide a sample batch file for this purpose? That’d be really helpful.

-----

TowerGuy74 219 days ago | link

In 1998, the NSA required MIT to subborn their PGP. MIT publicly stated that at the time. NSA simultaneously banned the use of MIT's European confederate's version of PGP by U.S. citizens, and blocked access to that university's FTP from the U.S. Naturally, being overseas at the time, I downloaded the European version and, since it allowed creation of up-to 4096-bit keys with the option of manually-specifying non-standard lengths, I created a very large key which I saved to floppy disk.

-----

dfox 223 days ago | link

Time complexity of RSA operations is somewhere between O(n^2) and O(n^3) with n being number of bits of modulus, so using longer keys than necessary gets impractical really fast.

-----

bostik 223 days ago | link

It should be O(n^2). Doubling the length of the key will incur a four-fold time requirement for any single RSA operation. (I verified this a few years ago when writing an article about practical cryptosystems.)

The reason is actually quite simple. As far as I understand, the bignum libraries store the large numbers as an array of "limbs". Doing a bignum operation requires the library to iterate through the array, one limb and a time. The operations required for a single RSA calculation are effectively "run every limb in array A against every limb in array B". So you have a nested for-loop for N elements without possibility for early termination.

As for the numbers from the article: my old 400MHz box spent 20ms signing or encrypting a block of data with 1024-bit RSA key. The same operations took 80ms with a 2048-bit key.

-----

r4pha 223 days ago | link

But doesn't PGP/GPG use the pub/priv key only to encrypt/decrypt a _symmetric_ key for the encryption/decryption of the actual data?

-----


Do you have any monetization plans?

-----

JRambo 224 days ago | link

That was never the intent. A sponsor would be nice. Any tips?

-----

rbchv 223 days ago | link

It would be useful if you had some idea of who your public is. Then you could place some (hopefully unobtrusive) affiliate links for some product/service of their interest.

-----

More

Lists | RSS | Bookmarklet | Guidelines | FAQ | DMCA | News News | Feature Requests | Bugs | Y Combinator | Apply | Library

Search: