Re: [Cfrg] On the use of Montgomery form curves for key agreement

Benjamin Black <b@b3k.us> Tue, 02 September 2014 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <b@b3k.us>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE891A88DA for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:47:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gVRKNl6K9vn7 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC2931A88D8 for <cfrg@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id cc10so8254033wib.12 for <cfrg@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=9jevgtb14R8KnaEt5G9CfXUBIcLAOAifHm67BJIUs0M=; b=k82w2h41xBpX6tdua1EnBLI+nlcsblWysEIFNjUhu6KSz0m2BzHAIW7dh5DywspVcx brANyHgOVM3mlzGsUMDQZoQx5R/jYsLKWv4QTon0LahnYlIHcpFYT60lTsJiwQhvgYJi 4cnUUggi/iMfqFlXdG0tL6C0tmGnmI6+Kh83YSCkH94krWcfaVks+gLjqmhgObPByZNu HiW6wMy/Mq8c6A6MABx6H/kdpI2WoZnayFnjdfjOLew0Cbjt/EJ8qEV3z/MWgxzErV+g nKwX8j/NvE57gV48uFzudieazrugJJ/dGoVi7PktevYH83n8wjDYJ+JYG9ytsZa3kekl vXOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlwWMM/O2pXvOsWTv/BKTDEoPi2bhQzrhKdaue5HmoKMRL3RlUCHlKwv7qt5rCqPYzdeQ+w
X-Received: by 10.180.21.199 with SMTP id x7mr31325356wie.73.1409694451477; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.44.138 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0c=SRzDGU7qmDqNeysL82dH+E4Y9gmOfpbXb3AZj7Bo5qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e16ac4926a934565a65456058e50b68e@BL2PR03MB242.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CALCETrUby2o5O3=tMkv20JTVkahSo5Wan4oSCPOspRnXhFCg+g@mail.gmail.com> <b53e2c5417d247199f4496e0c0d5c29c@BL2PR03MB242.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CACsn0cktxTyPpeaqKU-oL+DiP4Fu0risHB1Wx8-by+94s30h=g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+Vbu7yMvyPzRAGrtVH38mzaYy3XQ1wswEUQisqbwpT10JfQVg@mail.gmail.com> <54058021.9040801@cs.tcd.ie> <CACsn0c=XV4bQSa7Oh3=s+JvFpJdT3Lm16wQHRG2ACEjxuU-dvg@mail.gmail.com> <5405E343.7010302@cs.tcd.ie> <CACsn0c=SRzDGU7qmDqNeysL82dH+E4Y9gmOfpbXb3AZj7Bo5qg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Benjamin Black <b@b3k.us>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:47:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+Vbu7yRe0VAfb+3v_aL3D-LVey+UYy0VmN8eMyXMyxoE-DAKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bb70c8005c09405021c114d
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/-ettJhXP-q_ySOTE8cGO6mr6KCE
Cc: "cfrg@ietf.org" <cfrg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] On the use of Montgomery form curves for key agreement
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 21:47:36 -0000

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>; wrote:

>
> >
> > Main point is: I don't believe wire-format issues make any
> > difference when picking new curves.
>
> *None* of the arguments advanced so far help with picking new curves.
> What possible difference is there between NUMS and the DJB/Tanja
> curves?


One notable difference is between the generation algorithms. While the
distinction might not be relevant to you, it is relevant to many others.


b