But would you agree with my point - that keys generated using only the numbers 1-6 are not as secure as if they had been generated using the numbers 0-9, never mind the other characters on the keyboard? Would it really take a supercomputer many years to bruteforce 64 numbers in the range 1-6?
I would only agree if the exponent was the same.
10^x > 6^x (10 to the power of x is greater than 6 to the power of x).
Apparently you don't quite understand the power of exponentiation
or you don't understand how basic probabilities work with combinations.
If you roll a die, there's a 1 in 6 chance to roll, say a one.
to roll 2 ones in a row, is 1/36 (6^2)
to roll 3 ones in a row, is 1/216 (6^3)
...and up it goes.
when we look at 6^64, the exponent 64 is much more important than the 6.
in the end its still a huge number of combinations.
You could flip a coin 160 times and get about the same number of combinations.
Its not any less secure because there's "only two" numbers (heads or tails).
To get the same combinations using digits 0-9, you'd have to use 49 digits.
To get the same number of combos using all uppercase letters, all lowercase
letters, plus 10 digits, (62 characters), you only need about 28...
so whether you use 2^160, 6^64 , 10^49 or 62^28, its all the same number
of combinations. And a supercomputer cannot try that many combinations
as I spelled out in one of my previous posts in this thread.
