Re: [Cfrg] Call for adoption: Threshold Signatures

Ian Goldberg <iang@uwaterloo.ca> Thu, 08 October 2020 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <iang@uwaterloo.ca>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BDA33A0E21 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uwaterloo.ca
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 GMfwjyf792gq for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:20:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psyche.uwaterloo.ca (psyche.uwaterloo.ca [129.97.128.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5CA13A103C for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:20:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.paip.net (whisk.cs.uwaterloo.ca [198.96.155.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by psyche.uwaterloo.ca (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 098LK1Jg018769 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:20:03 -0400
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 psyche.uwaterloo.ca 098LK1Jg018769
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uwaterloo.ca; s=default; t=1602192004; bh=9CHhL3ea3BxA2yT4Zhhoykw7PUhUqUSoKq7j5krdAQo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ltskOR9nq03HpKVt3jfwNjzqwV29Lb5kX4b3OFSjXQb1Vk0WLznCUIVTZaVHVZ2Hq 2L/7AEA9x3yy/UlUjS7WZP53i1dHlCwDmGmotpedwlQpQS14uHMH5yUo2oQiljBSNm douKKLFD7xOwZSK4TMBh7oLYT1L/Qo1Rwj09Bolc=
Received: from yoink (brandeis.paip.net [66.38.236.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.paip.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3EB2D5FC0047; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:20:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from iang by yoink with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <iang@uwaterloo.ca>) id 1kQdKS-0006ZW-LI; Thu, 08 Oct 2020 17:20:00 -0400
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:20:00 -0400
From: Ian Goldberg <iang@uwaterloo.ca>
To: cfrg@irtf.org
Message-ID: <20201008212000.GI16060@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <CAFDDyk_U_HPS+Mmn4jnBqMUkAzpsB9r1VS4iWeVJYwKRUsUV0g@mail.gmail.com> <20201008211158.GC2207@patternsinthevoid.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201008211158.GC2207@patternsinthevoid.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-UUID: 19506253-5793-4ad9-93f3-9369c15de6a7
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/dEPStlG0TZXWHpzzvEi-pziVRsA>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Call for adoption: Threshold Signatures
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 08 Oct 2020 21:20:48 -0000

On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 09:11:58PM +0000, isis agora lovecruft wrote:
> Nick Sullivan transcribed 2.9K bytes:
> > Dear CFRG participants,
> > 
> > After some active conversations on the mailing list, there seems to be
> > support for taking on work related to threshold signatures at the CFRG.
> > This email commences a 3-week call for adoption for the topic of "Threshold
> > Signatures" that will end on October 28th, 2020:
> > 
> > There are two drafts that have been submitted for consideration on this
> > topic:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-komlo-frost/
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hallambaker-threshold-sigs/
> > 
> > Please give your views on the following questions:
> > a) should this topic be adopted by the CFRG as a work item, and if so
> > b) should one or both of these documents should be considered as a starting
> > point for this work
> > c) are you willing to help work on this item and/or review it
> > 
> > Please reply to this email (or in exceptional circumstances, you can email
> > CFRG chairs directly at cfrg-chairs@ietf.org).
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > Nick (for the chairs)
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cfrg mailing list
> > Cfrg@irtf.org
> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I would definitely like to see a standarisation of FROST move forward, since I
> already have two clients interested in using it, and I have a Rust
> implementation in progress here: https://github.com/isislovecruft/frost-dalek
> (If you grep for "[CFRG]" there's a few comments on things that I suspect might
> be useful to specify in a standard.)
> 
> To that end, I'm happy to help the authors with both working on the draft and
> review.

Multiple implementations already!  That's great!

I suppose I should just say for the record that as one of the authors of
FROST, I of course am also interested in seeing it move forward, and
would be involved in working on it.
-- 
Ian Goldberg
Canada Research Chair in Privacy Enhancing Technologies
Professor, Cheriton School of Computer Science
University of Waterloo