From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 15 22:28:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA09524 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 15 May 1997 22:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lestat.nas.nasa.gov (lestat.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.50.29]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA09518 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 22:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lestat.nas.nasa.gov (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA27175; Thu, 15 May 1997 22:14:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705160514.WAA27175@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> X-Authentication-Warning: lestat.nas.nasa.gov: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Ben Black Cc: "Pedro F. Giffuni" , "Ron G. Minnich" , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cluster Computing in BSD Reply-To: Jason Thorpe From: Jason Thorpe Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:14:17 -0700 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 16 May 1997 00:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Ben Black wrote: > the current RC5 distributed cracking effort shows quite clearly that > something as advanced as MOSIX is not required. if his logic is that bad > guys will use MOSIX to crack encryption brute force then he is fooling > himself. Who says Bad Guys(tm) only want to crack encryption? In the environment I come from, that's simply not a very interesting problem. There are lots of more complex problems that a general purpose parallel supercomputer might be good for. We use them to solve fluid dynamics problems. I'm sure there are Bad Guys(tm) that might want to solve problems with similar complexity. There are typically export controls and/or cost factors that keep Bad Guys(tm) from purchasing parallel supercomputers. But, if they can make a supercomputer out of parts that they can easily get, that's potentially somthing to worry about. Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: 408.866.1912 NAS: M/S 258-6 Work: 415.604.0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: 415.428.6939