Re: NIST publishes new DSA draft

[James Couzens <[e-mail]>]

> Hi, James - I'm afraid you are off by a year on that.  Those reports
> were from 2005, not 2006.  They have been intensively discussed here and
> elsewhere in the cryptographic community.  Indeed, those findings are a
> good part of why I was proposing making SHA-256 a MUST, along with the
> fact that this hash will now be able to be used with DSS signatures.

My apologies, you are quite correct.  I recently joined the list a few
months ago, and haven't reviewed it historically, and as such I wasn't
present for the referenced discussion(s) intense or otherwise :-)  

I had thought it a bit strange that someone writing so comprehensively
about something related to digital signatures and to then make the
statement as you did at the end of the paragraph I quoted.  Did you have
some other intended meaning, such as broken by draft explicit
prohibition or otherwise declared deprecated in a future draft?

Cheers,

James


-- 
James Couzens,
Programmer
 ___ __  __  ___ 
| __|  \/  |/ __| The Electric Mail Company
| _|| |\/| | (__  Managed, Secure Email Services
|___|_|  |_|\___| http://www.electricmail.com
                  Direct Line: 604.482.1111 x152
--------------------------------------------------
PGP Key Fingerprint:
B2EF B741 1807 2F24 8B70  F89B 03D2 6CFF C52F 0052