Prime search, sequential or random better?

Article View: sci.crypt

Article #1847

#1847

From: Robert Cain
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:23

18 lines
1034 bytes

A while back I remember a discussion on searching for a large prime where
it was stated that it is better (and I cannot remember why) to randomly
generate candidates rather than just randomly selecting a starting
point and searching incrementally.  Can anyone refresh me why that is
true and how important it is?

Thanks,

Bob
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts


               PGP 1.0 or 2.0 public key available on request.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Nov18.002352.29811@netcom.com>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!rcain

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!rcain
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Prime search, sequential or random better?
Message-ID: <1992Nov18.002352.29811@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:23:52 GMT
Lines: 18