IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: DH group exchange (Re: SSH key algorithm updates)

nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller ) Mon, 09 November 2015 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 074991B866E for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:30:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 4chnfO2fxXLO for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:30:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7::25]) (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 0C1EE1B8665 for <secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:30:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 89C0514A2C6; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:30:44 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org
Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1347) id 2218114A2C5; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:30:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2397C14A2C3 for <ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:22:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at NetBSD.org
Received: from mail.netbsd.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.NetBSD.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with ESMTP id 0JTtEgN-MkfU for <ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:22:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54A5F14A219 for <ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:22:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0578A40032; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 19:22:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: from armitage.lysator.liu.se (armitage.lysator.liu.se [IPv6:2001:6b0:17:f0a0::83]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with SMTP id 6BA6F40021; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 19:22:44 +0100 (CET)
Received: by armitage.lysator.liu.se (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 09 Nov 2015 19:22:44 +0100
From: nisse@lysator.liu.se
To: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Cc: "Mark D. Baushke" <mdb@juniper.net>, denis bider <ietf-ssh3@denisbider.com>, Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>, "ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org" <ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org>, "stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "jon@siliconcircus.com" <jon@siliconcircus.com>
Subject: Re: DH group exchange (Re: SSH key algorithm updates)
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4B5993D@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <2096379125-720@skroderider.denisbider.com> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4B599ED@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <55190.1447001241@eng-mail01.juniper.net> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4B5A9BC@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 19:22:44 +0100
In-Reply-To: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4B5A9BC@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> (Peter Gutmann's message of "Mon, 9 Nov 2015 00:46:54 +0000")
Message-ID: <nnziyn2ft7.fsf@armitage.lysator.liu.se>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org
List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org
Precedence: list

Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz> writes:

> Since the verification process for both 186 and Lim-Lee generated values is
> identical, you can verify the keys either way.  So the spec would cover both
> NIST and non-NIST options at the same time, depending on implementer
> preference.

I'm not following the fine details here, but does the verification step
include proving the primality of p (and q)? 

Regards,
/Niels

-- 
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email