IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cfrg] Switching the zero-check from MUST to MAY in the curves draft.

Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org> Wed, 18 November 2015 00:19 UTC

Return-Path: <alangley@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 25D351B35FA for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 TYp50K3i4eEi for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x236.google.com (mail-qg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 038C61B35F9 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qgea14 with SMTP id a14so17781525qge.0 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=0Ktr0Sb2VBbQrDAbHYMMYhPMQdqscL5+BXU/4OuqDNc=; b=DJ3SxGIJcmzcS4gcAqwLkss1K1YtyyivwNLx8FFQsW6GB0YhMREHKsVw5w+ZHuCEMw UCpJYmupZYbZOtSAUByMMHr3G83j/5OC1B39kYECBvLlMkvVaSfrQVzWjjdzMk3L1ZQs AkcIhnrj0ZcC4tjLST7hPvArJt98kI95IYc7vTTtl+8MWTCMEBn8CYcDIYwNiamPzNm0 aZxD6LHqYqLm1w0asomcmxu/b+xWmy1mfbuWhEjDQvnJLXSnUYqql0CbOofvakb2trX+ 72LIP5gHTkfWUTxggEzRYAtnsDSeqGzpMfIvwMn9p8JQs7IebO1UqJ2WOQuZAdrn9V4a XmJQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.140.72 with SMTP id 69mr34481376qhm.60.1447805979147; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:39 -0800 (PST)
Sender: alangley@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.97.66 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAFR824wRO9mPGmkPhjA9bR5QTkrZ-OVRZsmoiPjBR2-kVrCHDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMfhd9XgxrFyRxEqd=4NSX29t=ymQeyq3pT6VjpezUgrm6TyBg@mail.gmail.com> <D26FCB5D.2261F%uri@ll.mit.edu> <CAFR824wRO9mPGmkPhjA9bR5QTkrZ-OVRZsmoiPjBR2-kVrCHDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:19:39 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9dAMPuOcUITBSqu2oqWz4PfcGLE
Message-ID: <CAMfhd9U4SBsn9+eKOAYi4ZNJ-RExdXnqx76DuanioqFaFCEH3A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>
To: Deirdre Connolly <durumcrustulum@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/XKqWhRabEezdmQ6PuqKJusrW260>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Switching the zero-check from MUST to MAY in the curves draft.
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 00:19:41 -0000

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Deirdre Connolly
<durumcrustulum@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that your description fits 'SHOULD' more than 'MAY', given that the
> expanded Security Considerations imply that "the full implications must be
> understood and carefully weighed" before not checking for an all-zero
> output.

I'm not sure that I've strong feelings between SHOULD and MAY in this
case, but I see your point. I expect I'll see what the feelings of the
other authors and chairs is during AUTH48 and exactly where to draw
this line.


Cheers

AGL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email