At 08:23 AM 9/10/04 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:

<http://www.vnunet.com/print/1157970> Perplexing proof

E-commerce is only one mathematical breakthrough away from disaster Robert Valpuesta, IT Week 09 Sep 2004

The fact that even experts often do not fully understand how IT systems

work was underlined by recent reports that the Riemann hypothesis, established in 1859, may finally have been proved.

It seems the hypothesis would explain the apparently random pattern of prime numbers that form the basis for much internet cryptography, used for e-commerce and online banking to guard accounts and credit card

This doesn't follow. details. Can someone explain how finding regularity in the distribution of primes would affect any modexp() system? Suppose that you have a function F(i) which gives you the i-th prime. Since the PK systems (eg RSA, DH) use *randomness* to pick primes, how does being able to generate the i-th prime help?

Louis de Branges, a renowned mathematician at Purdue University in the US, has claimed he can prove the hypothesis. But the maths is so complicated that no one has yet been able to say whether his solution is right.

"[The suggested proof] is rather incomprehensible," professor Marcus du

Sautoy of Oxford University told The Guardian, adding that if correct it could lead to the creation of a "prime spectrometer" that would bring "the whole of e-commerce to its knees overnight".

Methinks the "expert" du Sautoy is an expert in number theory, not crypto...

Unfortunately, most managers have no way of telling whether the proof is right or its implications are indeed as stated.

embarrassment if they are asked to assess risks for corporate governance reports, since they clearly now have a duty to own up and admit that business could be threatened by a theoretical prime spectrometer.

Alternatively they might accept that security is a matter of faith, declare that nothing can truly be "known", and add that the way of Zen shows

Most managers don't understand crypto. This could be an that

security is probably an illusion anyway.

I think this latter indicates the cluelessness of the author.