Re: [Cfrg] Criteria for the selection of new ECC mechanisms

On Tue, April 29, 2014 11:43 am, Rene Struik wrote:
[snip]
> RS>>
> I think Michael Hamburg also concurred with my note. I fail to see why
> one cannot possibly get a good PAKE protocol that relies, e.g., on
> GLV/GLS-friendly curves. Can you give an example of a PAKE scheme that
> "requires" indistinguishability, so as to have a proof point?
> <<RS

  EKE.

  Dan.

>> thanks and regards,
>>
>> David
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Footnotes:    [1] Original criteria set out for the Advanced
>>> Encryption Standard,        which is equally applicable to ECC.
>>> National Institute of        Standards and Technology (NIST) of the
>>> United States, 1998.    [2] Daniel J. Bernstein and Tanja Lange.
>>> SafeCurves: choosing safe
>>>> curves for elliptic-curve cryptography.
>>>>        http://safecurves.cr.yp.to, accessed April 2014.
>>>>
>>>>    [3] Criteria identified by David McGrew, 2014.
>>>>
>>>>    [4] Criteria identified by Russ Housley, TLS WG meeting at IETF89.
>>>>
>>>>    [5] Criteria widely acknowledged on CFRG email list during 2014.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Cfrg mailing list
>>>> Cfrg@irtf.org
>>>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> email: rstruik.ext@gmail.com | Skype: rstruik
> cell: +1 (647) 867-5658 | US: +1 (415) 690-7363
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> Cfrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>