Didn't even find a useless factor of an uninteresting number! Take that! - Page 24

storflyt32 · 2016-09-08, 18:37

Should note that I have put away my glasses and unable to find them.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863720087

From the factorization of RSA-155.

P +/- 1 and Q +/- 1.

Therefore the individual factors are already known.

Of course I could give it a try first, but if it does not work, here are the factors.

P51 = 514312985943800777534375166399250129284222855975011

P63 = 325649100849833342436871870477394634879398067295372095291531269

The other factors are smaller.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863733694

Here apparently a P38 factor.

Running the same number in another window, it refuses to come up with a similar answer and for now I let the first one continue.

I finally or eventually got the result after a quite long wait.

Also the same P38 factor when doing manually trial division the opposite way.

Therefore I continue on both the C169 being returned as well as the C131.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863813320

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000805719329

Is this C155 perhaps a RSA-512 or the like when it comes to the bit length of the number?

storflyt32 · 2016-09-08, 19:52

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863892130

Noticing right now that the C169 has found the P38 factor.

The rest of it has yet to be finished.

Adding the factor coming up in a short while.

Edit: The factor became added.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-09, 23:15

The previous post was in the middle of the day and not a lecture at all.

Here:

C71 = 72608524741567677552251858665987572593365104415866304732860065808688249

Trying ecm on this number since the other things do not work.

Possibly the factors are already known.

Since I happened to mention the possible incompatibility problem between 32 bits and 64 bits software, or possibly a similar or related hardware architecture, trying out this number using Yafu-win32 from the built-in DOS prompt does not work any better.

And right now, at 1 AM in the morning, the correct word is coming to my mind.

Namely emulator.

It is not about a possible compatibility versus incompatibility and even for that word, I was about to use Google Translate, because I had the feeling it could be "...compatibility" instead.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865285335

Edit: Thanks for doing that.

My processor is not good at doing this, but perhaps a couple of other things instead.

Also since things appear to be working, I could give a try at the complete factorization of some of these numbers.

It could take a while, though.

The menrtioned C71 also got factorized by means of ecm right now.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-10, 00:38

. . .

P305 = 5477145615003861449700049321930493509281487250838078975039949061294667907
73964046366343419102075869593666696196936218780915167963114210023288915233533147
83552044209596262450166412392021801443029052356270913828673230945124328722305581
380993298951135787866754410919924536135340853339415981812675173250969557

P307 = 1310894420948772817953766174823038828035167232791153584294861794654515404
59474031894585112814116694078321586252089046090761920864971968858510636388921949
98741269950593586385093645896916189031534201752980587422349261143929201255018136
45351473254245420067580328672826766045728309019545477581876480191607682411

P307 = 3150275430527586980397995114125460614007707495849011705241385759508873009
36314010948953943611553722146794798921081925466745965610470909177241288061763889
80116723938473812907863111640051134745451243067451127888395021204792785780681734
30714312699296436239088507565946572855598479761482343962913192492101363177

P307 = 9193641402329644767814635720885744814323623170790247580495986003231202374
11203673324078498110099817858015290744094737659166469413320922818194845469515777
86182284985847688017710165302378677557606213411854991533548122457795137388776858
85721262528151192059317775462830127729320353569871246554068115506120093289

P308 = 1122482711211228161049985310417850298186466722564484888273746063957788884
23001809414440749391315506385015311360068094258638768418367372421788156154138246
01213542322321493928671839184672743972768935531683803240244283503156404290194150
641660770653367275219019597502269804105401183645727642645890602159624627143

. . .

storflyt32 · 2016-09-11, 09:37

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865883213

RSA-768 * RSA-1024

But apparently not so here.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-11, 11:33

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865903530

This number did not take ecm when using 2^21 curves on it.

Trying with 2^22 curves when I get the opportunity.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000864699783

The flip of the coin is being found here.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-18, 01:48

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867204329

That was when I was out shopping.

And not the easiest one either.

Guess I am dumb.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-18, 18:28

My apologies.

The previous factor became found by some other first.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867356676

But I think I found a little better one yesterday and reporting it right now.

storflyt32 · 2016-09-23, 19:21

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867780303

Found this factorization of a composite number.

If I chose to give it a try, would it actually be working?

But when it comes to the larger picture, such a thing actually shows to be worth it.

storflyt32 · 2016-10-03, 08:55

http://mersenneforum.org/showthread....13977&page=106

The third last post from bottom.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000871000087

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000871000185

What a coincidence (or what)?

storflyt32 · 2016-10-12, 11:42

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000876377848

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000876457487

Here it became one of my bigger ones, at least when it comes to direct factorization of a number.

The second link is having a pair of P46 and P136 factors.

I will go out shopping first and have it up later on.

Also I have not checked the P136 yet when it comes to being a factor of something else, but except for that,
this is definitely a better one.

Total factoring time = 43238.5471 seconds

Edit: The P136 loops back to the P123 in the first link when manually trial dividing, but perhaps I could add this myself?

2016-09-08, 18:37	#254
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2·229 Posts	Should note that I have put away my glasses and unable to find them. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863720087 From the factorization of RSA-155. P +/- 1 and Q +/- 1. Therefore the individual factors are already known. Of course I could give it a try first, but if it does not work, here are the factors. P51 = 514312985943800777534375166399250129284222855975011 P63 = 325649100849833342436871870477394634879398067295372095291531269 The other factors are smaller. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863733694 Here apparently a P38 factor. Running the same number in another window, it refuses to come up with a similar answer and for now I let the first one continue. I finally or eventually got the result after a quite long wait. Also the same P38 factor when doing manually trial division the opposite way. Therefore I continue on both the C169 being returned as well as the C131. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863813320 http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000805719329 Is this C155 perhaps a RSA-512 or the like when it comes to the bit length of the number? Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-08 at 18:44

2016-09-08, 19:52	#255
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2×229 Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000863892130 Noticing right now that the C169 has found the P38 factor. The rest of it has yet to be finished. Adding the factor coming up in a short while. Edit: The factor became added. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-08 at 19:58

2016-09-09, 23:15	#256
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2×229 Posts	The previous post was in the middle of the day and not a lecture at all. Here: C71 = 72608524741567677552251858665987572593365104415866304732860065808688249 Trying ecm on this number since the other things do not work. Possibly the factors are already known. Since I happened to mention the possible incompatibility problem between 32 bits and 64 bits software, or possibly a similar or related hardware architecture, trying out this number using Yafu-win32 from the built-in DOS prompt does not work any better. And right now, at 1 AM in the morning, the correct word is coming to my mind. Namely emulator. It is not about a possible compatibility versus incompatibility and even for that word, I was about to use Google Translate, because I had the feeling it could be "...compatibility" instead. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865285335 Edit: Thanks for doing that. My processor is not good at doing this, but perhaps a couple of other things instead. Also since things appear to be working, I could give a try at the complete factorization of some of these numbers. It could take a while, though. The menrtioned C71 also got factorized by means of ecm right now. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-09 at 23:39

2016-09-10, 00:38	#257
storflyt32 Feb 2013 111001010₂ Posts	. . . P305 = 5477145615003861449700049321930493509281487250838078975039949061294667907 73964046366343419102075869593666696196936218780915167963114210023288915233533147 83552044209596262450166412392021801443029052356270913828673230945124328722305581 380993298951135787866754410919924536135340853339415981812675173250969557 P307 = 1310894420948772817953766174823038828035167232791153584294861794654515404 59474031894585112814116694078321586252089046090761920864971968858510636388921949 98741269950593586385093645896916189031534201752980587422349261143929201255018136 45351473254245420067580328672826766045728309019545477581876480191607682411 P307 = 3150275430527586980397995114125460614007707495849011705241385759508873009 36314010948953943611553722146794798921081925466745965610470909177241288061763889 80116723938473812907863111640051134745451243067451127888395021204792785780681734 30714312699296436239088507565946572855598479761482343962913192492101363177 P307 = 9193641402329644767814635720885744814323623170790247580495986003231202374 11203673324078498110099817858015290744094737659166469413320922818194845469515777 86182284985847688017710165302378677557606213411854991533548122457795137388776858 85721262528151192059317775462830127729320353569871246554068115506120093289 P308 = 1122482711211228161049985310417850298186466722564484888273746063957788884 23001809414440749391315506385015311360068094258638768418367372421788156154138246 01213542322321493928671839184672743972768935531683803240244283503156404290194150 641660770653367275219019597502269804105401183645727642645890602159624627143 . . . Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-10 at 00:38

2016-09-11, 09:37	#258
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2·229 Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865883213 RSA-768 * RSA-1024 But apparently not so here. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-11 at 10:12

2016-09-11, 11:33	#259
storflyt32 Feb 2013 1CA₁₆ Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000865903530 This number did not take ecm when using 2^21 curves on it. Trying with 2^22 curves when I get the opportunity. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000864699783 The flip of the coin is being found here. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-09-11 at 11:35

2016-09-18, 01:48	#260
storflyt32 Feb 2013 458₁₀ Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867204329 That was when I was out shopping. And not the easiest one either. Guess I am dumb.

2016-09-18, 18:28	#261
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2×229 Posts	My apologies. The previous factor became found by some other first. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867356676 But I think I found a little better one yesterday and reporting it right now.

2016-09-23, 19:21	#262
storflyt32 Feb 2013 712₈ Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000867780303 Found this factorization of a composite number. If I chose to give it a try, would it actually be working? But when it comes to the larger picture, such a thing actually shows to be worth it.

2016-10-03, 08:55	#263
storflyt32 Feb 2013 111001010₂ Posts	http://mersenneforum.org/showthread....13977&page=106 The third last post from bottom. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000871000087 http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000871000185 What a coincidence (or what)? Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-10-03 at 08:55

2016-10-12, 11:42	#264
storflyt32 Feb 2013 2×229 Posts	http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000876377848 http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000876457487 Here it became one of my bigger ones, at least when it comes to direct factorization of a number. The second link is having a pair of P46 and P136 factors. I will go out shopping first and have it up later on. Also I have not checked the P136 yet when it comes to being a factor of something else, but except for that, this is definitely a better one. Total factoring time = 43238.5471 seconds Edit: The P136 loops back to the P123 in the first link when manually trial dividing, but perhaps I could add this myself? Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2016-10-12 at 11:56

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Can Pollard Rho cycles be used to find a factor?	wwf	Factoring	26	2013-09-30 04:24
PFGW can't find a small factor.	Arkadiusz	Software	7	2013-02-18 12:43
Chance to find an n-digit factor with ECM	RedGolpe	Factoring	4	2007-03-23 15:24
How much ECM does it take to find a given factor?	geoff	Factoring	5	2004-09-29 20:14
Where I find the best program to it factor keys? I use AMD.	chrow	Factoring	5	2004-02-19 10:15