IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cfrg] Point format endian (was: Adoption of draft-ladd-spake2 as a RG document)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 27 January 2015 10:56 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 586C51A8792 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:56:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 ZdSs7GWR9JDF for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:56:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85F0A1A8790 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:56:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936DFBE57; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:56:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wjm1laUJteoD; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:56:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71A96BDCB; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:56:45 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <54C76EED.6090205@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:56:45 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>, "'cfrg@irtf.org'" <cfrg@irtf.org>
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73AAF68325@uxcn10-tdc05.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
In-Reply-To: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73AAF68325@uxcn10-tdc05.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/cJfo-R7UpZ34smNn27XS5lZZ36M>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Point format endian (was: Adoption of draft-ladd-spake2 as a RG document)
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: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:56:50 -0000

On 27/01/15 10:34, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> The universal standard for crypto bignums is big-endian

Hmmm.... sez who? :-)

But seriously, if in fact this makes little or no difference,
which I believe is the case, and which I believe you are also
arguing, then what is the problem with going with the initial
coder's choice here?

If there is no problem then just doing that and making sure
it's properly documented should be just fine I'd have thought.

S.

v2.14.0 | Report a Bug | By Email