The microblog: 2021.08.17 20:35:06

2021.08.17 20:35:06 (1427700528771866624) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Martin R. Albrecht (@martinralbrecht)" (1427691277798330369):

Starting link from his home page was to, and then looks like http->https autocorrect kicked in.


2021.08.17 19:06:22 (1427678201040367619) from Daniel J. Bernstein:

The proofs of "limits of Schnorr-like arguments over lattices" in are very specific to the choice of prime-power cyclotomics. As a random example, for non-prime-power m=225, degree 120, the smallest norm in the mth cyclotomic is 1801.

2021.08.17 19:10:23 (1427679208709320707) from Daniel J. Bernstein:

Bigger examples: m=365, degree 288, smallest norm 6571; 415, 328, 11621. Of course the failure of the proof in these cases (i.e., most cases!) doesn't imply that there are better constructions. Also, perhaps more importantly, cyclotomics raise all sorts of security concerns.

2021.08.17 19:35:51 (1427685618981621766) from Daniel J. Bernstein:

Scientifically, it's puzzling that this paper doesn't cite, which considers very similar objects in formula (1.16), constructs exactly the same prime-power examples in (3.1), and includes many further constructions + proofs on this topic. @martinralbrecht

2021.08.17 19:58:20 (1427691277798330369) from "Martin R. Albrecht (@martinralbrecht)":

I'm getting "This is the former website of the Mathematical Institute"?