Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange
Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> Thu, 12 November 2015 20:43 UTC
Return-Path: <bascule@gmail.com>
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 9E52E1B359C; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 zKNtQuhMWVol; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com (mail-io0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]) (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 848FF1B359A; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ioir85 with SMTP id r85so36876556ioi.1; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=YR4yprKgKF6Kq+rCtyv5tNOM8NZU+2nCsMJPHI7wp50=; b=AfypTihtiUOgXN8QonPnFzQ0HouzcTP+yagVHJfRHymKjQH5w4nBCR9yoOQRm4jlqA IDloT8lIPfPmzJKUrUS4l44vf1V68BqFm4GCkt3umPThhsoJRJedLuVy+bFR8/mLMwIL HzC57k1Jwx6v5ykTYIF0OL83YFsVxAVBiQSD1qsHFj2vdtYUL659zhx8/ODMrKeUfqN5 Mk0OOTmOIh5Lz2gnshx4Gf6BLMUVmohzaWbkfrNDscAqrjXzhKp7ji0Bxx17UXCiJXfz V4UazXAOCJ7TQyLrPrdrUty1QMWkVWKYkkCYjINuc9g//yqV8VK2Gbic58LXl+L4enfX AUdA==
X-Received: by 10.107.134.28 with SMTP id i28mr16103456iod.74.1447361012920; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.79.33.21 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <a8ac385bf717dc16a9c88c85f2c049c8.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
References: <20151112010004.7D71718000B@rfc-editor.org> <CACsn0cmK5bicERd17PMdha3P2V0rfFfQP11WzQ=trF7e=oDKpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHOTMVKnrjeLVi9tgXNBAp8ib4-ECQU-aG4jD9sqh9=1-7P38w@mail.gmail.com> <a8ac385bf717dc16a9c88c85f2c049c8.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
From: Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 12:43:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHOTMVLkd+N0Fe4kJJrdJae8dcj5_mCiYsPiikPLQGe4Qtct+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113ecc0a09792a05245dff57"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/vfeEEft2nrrztgkO3th-IlGigJs>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org, irtf-announce@irtf.org, ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 12 Nov 2015 20:43:37 -0000
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org> wrote: > It is nothing of the sort. That comment refers to the -00 > version of the draft which was rushed to get out before an I-D > cut-off date-- to see how rushed, note the "Acknowledgements" > section of the draft is the xml2rfc boilerplate. In my haste > I failed to include a check to validate received elements (note > that EAP-pwd which uses the exchange and was published before > the draft was written includes element validation so it was > part of the exchange, just not included in the -00 version). That section also claims that Dragonfly was proven under the random oracle model, then goes on to describe a version that wasn't... don't you think that's misleading? -- Tony Arcieri
- [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange rfc-editor
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Tony Arcieri
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Andy Lutomirski
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Dan Harkins
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Tony Arcieri
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Dan Harkins
- Re: [Cfrg] RFC 7664 on Dragonfly Key Exchange Andy Lutomirski