Re: [Cfrg] Alternatives to rigidity?

Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> Thu, 01 January 2015 02:50 UTC

Return-Path: <bascule@gmail.com>
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 01C4D1A1B2D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:50:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 qhBT1YNudUaF for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:50:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 066071A1B2B for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:50:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f44.google.com with SMTP id a141so3686542oig.3 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:50:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=1wO5eUwqwZ1cthmhWbiMvQCh5HUvjzBooleWeWO+dgA=; b=jyCqU4vyAvOSbfdhcZRubWX7e1ZrHfhho/xCrWHk7/nUC4hNNZKw2cDCul7OrU5xFH gPVoLw3TKmKmUDT1mIX4tXrhcMRZIh+QX19kyoLYGyGM0gPey86fW0dQVb+OuuP854mK /kaUXmiIDHLAtFQLvE9QG0exp48wl7FwHg+IaPRcsl2U9fDqYmEQTF7SjO+IAvEZAct8 eQ8EMCSkry1BaQZQV9ezt9U8zOqLLLx0PHptMSVpA9fKY6MlkqrW6yrP8P1QvjPL28Zk FCYv9a+BMesJ0CLOIAGjg4jVe9o127eGOWfVquTLwIIfMOy1qlKeZ5xB1wJJFN+lNCpr kkpQ==
X-Received: by 10.202.45.79 with SMTP id t76mr38910586oit.100.1420080614087; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:50:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.227.225 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:49:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAHOTMVLrThLThuHP_U6idVCJCGEJSSOkS-71HOPo3mSLQUGcUw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHOTMVLrThLThuHP_U6idVCJCGEJSSOkS-71HOPo3mSLQUGcUw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:49:53 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHOTMVJf_k8YN0g5aV+oSOnS-6Wo-O__R9yDcVo4iiqmDtkL-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1137d0228e223c050b8e4824
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/8VbT5GVn1KVw1lDmI3m39CnpXlo
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Alternatives to rigidity?
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, 01 Jan 2015 02:50:17 -0000

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are certainly other questions like a signature algorithm, but even
> there I think EdDSA is widely accepted, and performs well too.
>

And if EdDSA vs ECDSA is an issue, perhaps consider using Ed25519 keys and
convert to Weierstrass to do ECDSA. No need for FrankenECDSA that way.

-- 
Tony Arcieri