Re: [CFRG] compact representation and HPKE

[Billy Brumley <[e-mail]>]

> I think Karthik is on the right track here.  While the compact representation undoubtedly has its benefits, it seems like there is no disagreement that it is not widely supported in either standards or crypto libraries.  So there is a sizable community for whom a requirement to use the compact format would render HPKE unusable.

In the case of OpenSSL, I disagree.

If you (=application developer) are dealing with points directly in
OpenSSL, you are probably already doing it wrong.

Using the correct abstractions in OpenSSL, whether a "point" has 1, 2,
3, or 42 coordinates shouldn't matter. In fact when using the correct
abstraction in OpenSSL, you shouldn't know it's a point at all. Just a
byte string.

So I support this one, in the spirit of forward thinking, rather than
propagating ideas from two decades old standards

> (1) A technically superior approach (x-coordinate only)

I would suggest soliciting an opinion from the OpenSSL OTC before
making any decision based on perceived API difficulties.

My 2c, having never even read the HPKE draft.

BBB