Re: [Hipsec] AUTH48 [LB]: 5201-bis - Re: Reference problem in 5201-bis wrt SECP160R1

[Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>]

WONDERFUL!

thanks

On 01/28/2015 01:35 PM, Miika Komu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you mean this?
>
> http://perso.univ-rennes1.fr/sylvain.duquesne/master/standards/sec2_final.pdf 
>
>
> On 01/28/2015 05:54 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> We have a dangling reference in 5201-bis.
>>
>> It seems that the old reference for secp160r1 is no longer available.  I
>> cannot find anything in my searching.
>>
>> Can anyone point to a reference for it?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>>
>> On 08/08/2012 02:35 PM, Rene Struik wrote:
>>> Hi Bob:
>>>
>>> You are correct that SECG removed the prime curve secp160r1 from the
>>> SEC1 specification, when moving from v1.0 to v2.0. However, you can
>>> still access this under the "superseded specifications" tab: the 
>>> weblink
>>> should be http://www.secg.org/download/aid-386/sec2_final.pdf.
>>>
>>> You may also find this curve specified elsewhere, e.g., (if memory
>>> serves me well) with some copy protection schemes, such as DTCP.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Rene
>>>
>>> On 08/08/2012 9:24 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>> For low security we have SECP160R1 from:
>>>>
>>>>     [SECG]                      SECG, "Recommended Elliptic Curve 
>>>> Domain
>>>>                                 Parameters", SEC 2 , 2000,
>>>> <http://www.secg.org/>.
>>>>
>>>> I went there yesterday to look up some of the information on actual
>>>> sizes and got to:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.secg.org/download/aid-784/sec2-v2.pdf, published Jan 27,
>>>> 2010.
>>>>
>>>> And no SECP160R1, the smallest keysize now is SECP192R1 (sec 2.2.2).
>>>>
>>>> So we have a reference problem here as well as giving a developer the
>>>> parameter values needed to implement SECP160R1.
>>>>
>>>> Corrective action options:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Directly supply the parameters for SECP160R1 in Appendix D and
>>>> reference the version of secg they were pulled from.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Find a more stable source for SECP160R1 to reference.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Move to SECP192R1 (which I am leary of as ver 3.0 of secg could
>>>> drop that!).
>>>>
>>>> I vote for 1) and ask whoever has the older version of secg to forward
>>>> the parameters for inclusion.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, HIP DEX works a bit differently in that the keys generated from
>>>> the ECDH exchange are only used in protecting HIP packets and a
>>>> wrapped key exchange within HIP provides the keying material for
>>>> session keys (eg ESP or 802.15.4 security).  So in DEX, using
>>>> SECP160R1 may not be as much of a risk as in BEX, so I DO plan on
>>>> providing the SECP160R1 parameters in DEX.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Hipsec mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hipsec mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hipsec mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>
>