Re: [Cfrg] Safecurves draft redux

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Thu, 09 January 2014 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 C6F571AE400 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 07:37:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
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 lOYECTsxGU2j for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 07:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E401AE3EC for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 07:37:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s09FHW7W040206 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:17:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.230] claimed to be [10.20.30.90]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cn4paZTmeVExn+na0MwzdvSn+MF_bmyRZ869pJrWb_8Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 07:37:27 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5EF1DF9B-496A-4F02-ACCB-3BCE25F220D4@vpnc.org>
References: <CACsn0cn4paZTmeVExn+na0MwzdvSn+MF_bmyRZ869pJrWb_8Bg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Safecurves draft redux
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: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:37:44 -0000

On Jan 9, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> wrote:

> The naming issue is fine: we can say "the safecurve Mxxx has been
> found to be unsafe" without risk of being misunderstood.

Not at all. Having "safecurve Mxxx" be found unsafe will make many people think that all the other curves are unsafe.

The IETF has a long history of naming coming back to bite us in the butt. Please strongly consider getting rid of the "safecurve" name and just using the actual names that Dan an Tanja use.

--Paul Hoffman