Re: [Cfrg] OPAQUE at Facebook

Kevin Lewi <klewi@cs.stanford.edu> Thu, 29 August 2019 04:46 UTC

Return-Path: <klewi@cs.stanford.edu>
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 C746912006B for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 EApIxB0xnFye for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.cs.Stanford.EDU (smtp2.cs.stanford.edu [171.64.64.26]) (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 A9F25120052 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-f44.google.com ([209.85.210.44]:33188) by smtp2.cs.Stanford.EDU with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <klewi@cs.stanford.edu>) id 1i3CKF-0006qE-3a for cfrg@irtf.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:23 -0700
Received: by mail-ot1-f44.google.com with SMTP id p23so2183376oto.0 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXZaDDaJSpFlCa993jQkOJCbmZlWvY3Ea+m2nCfwHF7OkhlL6FM TXJbbpmuth8JTQGqgxmestLxheyPcmRxGQeuMcY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw7xbx0rA1ZCvBLO4zQJPYpmgkYZRCTV0+8eEiAAXeJuHfhzCHzZkeBML20nQq6hpPECMpLVSAcY2mr37CYJ0Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:77c4:: with SMTP id w4mr6270548otl.40.1567053982744; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACitvs_9SoZaG-0ZVNsGgcXJdadYHULVYEOH7VAQFf-VeSwm8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLP8p64=JRL9nsb+trdowxniBaxmd3yxp=cMX-4BkdM6t0+Xg@mail.gmail.com> <VI1PR0501MB225546F17933D62CA6587CF183A30@VI1PR0501MB2255.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <BCA185D1-1830-4CC7-80FF-0D6B4BE62497@gmail.com> <CAMr0u6mPAzozH-au+KcZuR2V9E8xo7HOy_3ZBR2Vy+CeWBHCoQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLP8p4KonMj2QdDCUg6y=cULiRhuhRuWddsMDndH5PmsVHuSw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOLP8p4KonMj2QdDCUg6y=cULiRhuhRuWddsMDndH5PmsVHuSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kevin Lewi <klewi@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:46:11 -0700
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CACitvs83O7we6wbONJRQ0kW+qUJhvG=t6JAsgVCHAG+RCgfeCw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACitvs83O7we6wbONJRQ0kW+qUJhvG=t6JAsgVCHAG+RCgfeCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@gmail.com>
Cc: "Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev" <smyshsv@gmail.com>, david wong <davidwong.crypto@gmail.com>, IRTF CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>, =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIEhhYXNl?= <bjoern.haase@endress.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Scan-Signature: b65b8f26ca423de213f14dca1c6ea011
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/qNTpcLsYOmdaXWcompG62geGb60>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] OPAQUE at Facebook
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, 29 Aug 2019 04:46:25 -0000

I'm also happy to help with the PAKE review process.

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:44 AM Bill Cox <waywardgeek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:40 PM Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <smyshsv@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Kevin, Bill, David, are you willing to volunteer to help with these reviews? Say, preparing short reviews regarding suitability of the nominated PAKEs for usage in certain kind of services.
>> We still have 17 days left - that must be enough for doing such short reviews.
>
>
> I would be happy to review the PAKE schemes, from an implementer's point of view.  I am a hacker rather than a cryptographer.  I implement a lot of cryptographic algorithms, and am familiar with practical differences in terms of threat models, efficiency, and such.  I also have more knowledge of password hashing than most folks, if that is helpful.