Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Consensus and a way forward]
Alyssa Rowan <akr@akr.io> Thu, 27 November 2014 22:13 UTC
Return-Path: <akr@akr.io>
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 B0E6B1A00B2 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:13:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 Jax0WNL9hYpW for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:13:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from entima.net (entima.net [78.129.143.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56AAE1A0019 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:13:26 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5477A208.2030709@akr.io>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 22:13:28 +0000
From: Alyssa Rowan <akr@akr.io>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
References: <CA+Vbu7xvvfRWyqyE9sqU7VbjzNQZp+DwRWjaV3Lw0hjLr8ye1A@mail.gmail.com> <5476CB73.7090206@akr.io> <92355F08-6319-4382-A87E-8C11D7325695@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <92355F08-6319-4382-A87E-8C11D7325695@isode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/I5_3jH1ukmZZb9HYLe_-wv3vDXc
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Consensus and a way forward]
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, 27 Nov 2014 22:13:30 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 27/11/2014 20:45, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > While it would be nice to have an open source implementation with > a liberal license, there is no requirement to have an open source > implementation to consider this proposal. And IRTF process doesn't > require that either. Indeed. But given the previous comments about benchmarking, how would we fairly evaluate it otherwise - and moreover, how attractive would the resulting proposal actually be to others? As Adam's pointed out, this proposal has generated something extremely close to an existing curve that's already on the table. I am not sure that there is a good clear justification for the only thing differentiating this proposal from that proposal; I don't currently think it's an improvement there. If we added - on the basis of wanting to ensure secure implementations of many possible things we might use it for (such as ECDH) are as simple as possible - the pretty reasonable criteria that there should be no weak keys, it would generate Curve25519, I understand. I would accept that outcome: and it has been very warmly received by the RG before, I recall. And then we'd have an equally clear process for a larger curve. (I bear Mike's comments in mind, of course; it needs discussion.) If we didn't want to do that, I'd want to be crystal-clear about the value of why not, and hence why anyone outside would ever want to choose this proposal above Curve25519. (Because right now, I wouldn't.) > I don't think asking for a transcript of all such discussions is > reasonable. Repeating some of the discussion, in particular in > response to clarifying questions might be. Having reconsidered: perhaps you're right! I simply wish the process to be as transparently and openly argued as possible, that's all: that is, after all, the primary value of IRTF making such recommendations, rather than major players such as Google and Microsoft making them by fiat. > People should treat the draft as any other contribution to the ECC > discussion in the RG. Indeed; I think it is a very encouraging sign overall, and provides a very good base narrowing the points (if you'll forgive the pun!) of technical contention. Hopefully we can converge on curves which are widely acceptable. - -- /akr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUd6IIAAoJEOyEjtkWi2t673EP/0QfqSw3J9bIwNs6lVaP8bcg YjxqUWxI5XuWvpNtPC8+GQPdA+Tgvv2jcvPOWIDOszX51m8+eXcNXACxaz+olwrL HKvtWRcY3MEq3GrZuyeBvvzpHhMAiIye+Tv3VcWyAHPYwz4xf9L9CFwWNCUrbO3W GWUZrQ5l4f0dMfZERlFTSnA8FBEXcbYj2lnLvWnwGbVpvA5vWbXl6R9m/pHEuOOg XQUz+G64hOw0ItoBTCyv+d2KGCyDqLT2LXBmpTXhkJeAMiT2gXN+FFZvcw+lGEU7 xuDkpGgweVG4IYCHekHap2jq4WNZ9QHVenxRwOngP5tylPjaCYWIH7uyfWlzvehG 9RF+q8WVCTNZO4bccNtdI6sWgfseZWBOiBdMOxgRxIvNUUaErdYAs/4OGizOvNUc 8RHVXIDtYgR+QsMkKCRLrv+f3o+I6EGmBYbY09xQYJ7LXY/m31ABS4NaFzIukFGX NirLPR5flpyQsdnUbw/U3ZOMQHjgZNLoJZDNEmArzwMU9leFzaFKUgvpI/5RgZf/ CKRSjfAl0qOGwPbUL1JIw09hp+SCPNTFIZYDuwzJplHqmTklr8BNAhRhdZPDrgzA sc5KriCFdJgAU1abg32ilrvTwLoO7jxW6NENLfsvpmHEshObxl3LiRRxFO2t3aKx IK6jAAkCdJEMt42zxxCk =+AJL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Joppe Bos
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Adam Langley
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Mike Hamburg
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Michael Hamburg
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Robert Ransom
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Adam Langley
- Re: [Cfrg] Consensus and a way forward Lochter, Manfred
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Robert Ransom
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Tony Arcieri
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… D. J. Bernstein
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Robert Ransom
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Benjamin Black
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Robert Ransom
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Harry Halpin
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Tanja Lange
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Tony Arcieri
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks D. J. Bernstein
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] draft-black-rpgecc-00-.txt [was: Conse… Tanja Lange
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks Paterson, Kenny
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks D. J. Bernstein
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks Salz, Rich
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Cfrg] Mishandling twist attacks Adam Back