Re: [Crypto-panel] Request for review: CPace

["Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the update, Karthik!

Regards,
Stanislav

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 8:35 AM Karthik Bhargavan <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Apologies for the delay. Will review it this week from the protocol
> viewpoint.
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2024, 07:08 Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Karthik,
>>
>> Any news with the review?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Stanislav (for CFRG chairs)
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:00 PM Karthikeyan Bhargavan <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok. I will put this on my stack.
>>>
>>> All my best,
>>> Karthik
>>>
>>> On 11 Oct 2023, at 10:56, Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Bjoern, Karthik and Thomas,
>>>
>>> The chairs would like to ask each of you to review the CPace draft,
>>> "CPace, a balanced composable PAKE", draft-irtf-cfrg-cpace-10 (
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-cpace/).
>>>
>>> There were a lot of reviews of the protocol and the early versions of
>>> the draft, see https://github.com/cfrg/pake-selection
>>> There were several important questions in those reviews which had to be
>>> addressed during the evolution of the draft in CFRG: some of them are
>>> underlined in the following paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/839.pdf –
>>> we would like to ask you to pay special attention to these issues.
>>>
>>> It would be great if you could do it before the middle of November.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Stanislav (for CFRG chairs)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 10:51 AM Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <
>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> We still need reviewers (three or four) for the CPace draft.
>>>>
>>>> Since CPace was a winner of the PAKE selection process, we have to be
>>>> 100% sure that all concerns have been properly addressed.
>>>>
>>>> Bjoern, Russ, Karthik, we will be happy to receive reviews from you
>>>> (taking into account your reviews provided during the PAKE Selection
>>>> process).
>>>>
>>>> Chloe, Julia, Jean-Philippe, Scott, if some of you could review the
>>>> CPace draft, despite the fact that you've just reviewed the OPAQUE draft
>>>> (thanks a lot once again for this!), that would be amazing as well.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Stanislav (for CFRG chairs)
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 3:17 PM Stanislav V. Smyshlyaev <
>>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Crypto Panel Experts,
>>>>>
>>>>> The chairs would like to ask the Crypto Panel to provide three (or
>>>>> more) reviews for the CPace draft, "CPace, a balanced composable PAKE",
>>>>> draft-irtf-cfrg-cpace-10 (
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-cpace/).
>>>>>
>>>>> The CPace protocol was selected as a result of the PAKE selection
>>>>> process in CFRG (as well as the OPAQUE protocol which has recently been
>>>>> reviewed by the Panel).
>>>>>
>>>>> There were a lot of reviews of the protocol and the early versions of
>>>>> the draft, see https://github.com/cfrg/pake-selection
>>>>> There were several important questions in those reviews which had to
>>>>> be addressed during the evolution of the draft in CFRG: some of them are
>>>>> underlined in the following paper:
>>>>> https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/839.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Hence we would like to ask the reviewers to pay a lot of attention to
>>>>> reviewing this draft, trying to take into account as many considerations
>>>>> provided in the previous reviews as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stanislav (on behalf of the CFRG Chairs)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>