Re: [Cfrg] BLS Signature for X.509

Benjamin Black <b@b3k.us> Wed, 05 October 2016 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <b@b3k.us>
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 E347E129593 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=b3k-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 Xx4dq21J3Oc6 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (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 49ABF1293FB for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id r126so282820496oib.0 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 11:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=b3k-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UKR2B0G34XOTnyDPWri2b6GsXy/An64jAwVxsh6Cf8E=; b=Kn+v+qe7JdpnWI6V+foyPvBSG2Ljfee+LU8L0plA5N4HAQIHltUXmTq4u/EgpiEFXw g4Zb3wEJU6DeObkIEtWW5v9nym5rYtSNEkbgF9nJOtIPUo4q0y7ZH0pvEi7l0y6tI8sJ /SsziRJEF9gIuBlqNWNxgKQ0PXHkbIESSeOU0APVgext2tb3lzbnGOKZsq6zAKzHgD2H lJalnrABDePG4Wy20uoGF5TxnyG3AymAVrQC74B5qDqRaYOxSenYUM9rWVAKbSPffrY9 Wk6HGukbRrExn4/pcpO/zrwXsJQsL89/0eC1Hxl03n4oA9c2aeGnIpxlXw9nyzwqNMWI AmPA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UKR2B0G34XOTnyDPWri2b6GsXy/An64jAwVxsh6Cf8E=; b=B4l7zoK2upV2CQIRPMKQwtOXGc67ODDQYfAMfFKGHrRVxZP0vgrzFmr+UueAjyFkVU Q1UnkG6hkbtKeR74lipMCZZq9dgVCtILZXFAEkAlPWLPFGleOHV201Me+O7chW+vwh5q 7Ua2buSIwzaZrItKEFMQV2MGeQIOQrlZ9hyzdPcMA7EHXy72h08LaCgeGWtmtXmKB3/Q q8NrQErojC98OZoFmm6sgEILa0cD4AUPDh7/X8ZAXq9a3d9b7qvh2PKZccigB7/nEWT2 I5Di5FYVDop8fXK3LHcVurubmI8g+Tv8xpjD024+nZ5AbbTpOPSq8XvDbAl7m0v5NSPw 7qCA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlMncom6ggLyy88AZHOx5lLZK1xRBT0xxyr7Rb/XeHk796VYHlw8EPHlwCmZTaScPZ2JTmAeSC/O9lhQw==
X-Received: by 10.202.225.215 with SMTP id y206mr8395707oig.66.1475690801451; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 11:06:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.6.138 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKDPBw9=5T9CefNquaK_FP5-yTyt-o+1XWOaUtqtnXUmDz1PnQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9E7BD18D-496F-4F93-9DC6-EC49B56825D2@adobe.com> <00F862CA-EBC6-43C5-B3E1-9EEC3BB01A81@adobe.com> <CAKDPBw8Em9Wp=+e9ML2Uqki65bOXzT_UEqK8_xp_W8xMypN=uw@mail.gmail.com> <D94DA7EC-8C8F-4B00-BE42-022CCA3A6E1A@adobe.com> <CAKDPBw9=5T9CefNquaK_FP5-yTyt-o+1XWOaUtqtnXUmDz1PnQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Benjamin Black <b@b3k.us>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:06:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+Vbu7wYVvKFCSDGvq+tO5Getd+K1t1ZL3JY2bb1CVJfe8DCsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Grubbs <pag225@cornell.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d5aae051cf8053e220a17
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/qCSe2cdZL6_3E0NCDCq6dMie7Dg>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] BLS Signature for X.509
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 05 Oct 2016 18:06:45 -0000

CFRG just recommended 2 non-NIST curves at the request of the TLS working
group. At least one of those curves is widely deployed for kex and
signatures in multiple protocols. Lack of NIST blessing is no longer an
impediment to adoption.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Paul Grubbs <pag225@cornell.edu> wrote:

> The IETF does play an important role in the process, but most people (at
> least in the US) won't consider anything in crypto 'standardized' unless it
> involves NIST.
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Antonio Sanso <asanso@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> hi Paul,
>>
>> thanks. Isn’t where this group can help though (namely standardization) ?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> antonio
>>
>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:01 PM, Paul Grubbs <pag225@cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>> BLS signatures would be nice for many reasons. The lack of standardized
>> pairing groups makes it a little difficult from a deployability
>> perspective, I think.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Antonio Sanso <asanso@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> anyome :S ?
>>>
>>> On Sep 30, 2016, at 8:57 AM, Antonio Sanso <asanso@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > hi *,
>>> >
>>> > sorry for the noise.
>>> > I was wondering if it was already discussed the idea to use BSL
>>> Signature for X.509.
>>> > AFAIK this will avoid certificate chains thanks to the signature
>>> aggregation property…
>>> > If this was already discussed I apologize.
>>> > If not WDYT about this?
>>> >
>>> > regards
>>> >
>>> > antonio
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Cfrg mailing list
>>> > Cfrg@irtf.org
>>> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cfrg mailing list
>>> Cfrg@irtf.org
>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> Cfrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>
>