Re: [TLS] On Curve25519 and other possibilities (e.g. ietf256p, ietf384p, ietf521p,

Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com> Fri, 04 July 2014 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <Johannes.Merkle@secunet.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9291D1A0173 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 07:59:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 qKWB1VL3kB9c for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 07:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com (a.mx.secunet.com [195.81.216.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C2791A0165 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 07:59:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (alg1 [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B13D1A0091; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:59:45 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id rtHwQfZhyalO; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:59:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-gw-int (unknown [10.53.40.207]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0946D1A008F; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:59:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.53.40.204] (port=53667 helo=mail-essen-01.secunet.de) by mail-gw-int with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1X34xe-0002tb-52; Fri, 04 Jul 2014 16:59:38 +0200
Received: from [10.208.1.76] (10.208.1.76) by mail-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:59:37 +0200
Message-ID: <53B6C159.7010002@secunet.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:59:37 +0200
From: Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alyssa Rowan <akr@akr.io>, <tls@ietf.org>
References: <53AC97B8.2080909@nthpermutation.com> <53AD134E.9010903@akr.io>
In-Reply-To: <53AD134E.9010903@akr.io>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.208.1.76]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/6Wi2eah6pZdtJ8nY28tTsGE56Ps
Subject: Re: [TLS] On Curve25519 and other possibilities (e.g. ietf256p, ietf384p, ietf521p,
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 14:59:49 -0000

Alyssa Rowan wrote on 27.06.2014 08:46:
> Brainpool has already generated a set of 'random' primes, but random primes are extremely slow to implement - and
> in the case of Brainpool, the 256-bit curve has extremely unfortunate lack of twist security, so any implementation
> that tries to skip validation is in really big trouble.

Why should anyone try to skip validation? In order to improve performance by less than 1%?


-- 
Johannes