On 2013-09-27 09:54, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
Quite, who on earth thought DER encoding was necessary or anything
other than incredible stupidity?
I have yet to see an example of code in the wild that takes a binary
data structure, strips it apart and then attempts to reassemble it to
Hey.
Not sure whether this has been pointed out / discussed here already (but
I guess Perry will reject my mail in case it has):
https://www.cdt.org/blogs/joseph-lorenzo-hall/2409-nist-sha-3
This makes NIST seem somehow like liars,... on the one hand they claim
to surprised by the alleged
On 28/09/13 20:07 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
b) is TLS1.3 (hopefully) and maybe some extensions for earlier
versions of TLS as well
SSL/TLS is a history of fiddling around at the edges. If there is to be
any hope, start again. Remember, we know so much more now. Call it
TLS2 if you
On Sep 28, 2013, at 3:06 PM, ianG wrote:
Problem with the NSA is that its Jekyll and Hyde. There is the good side
trying to improve security and the dark side trying to break it. Which
side did the push for EC come from?
What's in Suite A? Will probably illuminate that question...
The actual
On Sep 26, 2013, at 7:54 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
...[W]ho on earth thought DER encoding was necessary or anything other than
incredible stupidity?...
It's standard. :-)
We've been through two rounds of standard data interchange representations:
1. Network connections are slow,
2013/9/29 James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com
(..) fact, they are not provably random, selected (...)
fixed that for you
It seems obvious that blatant lying about qualities of procedures must have
some malignant intention, yet ignorance is as good an explanation. I don't
think lying the other
On 2013-09-30 03:14, Lodewijk andré de la porte wrote:
2013/9/29 James A. Donald jam...@echeque.com
mailto:jam...@echeque.com
(..) fact, they are not provably random, selected (...)
fixed that for you
It seems obvious that blatant lying about qualities of procedures must
have some
Gregory Maxwell on the Tor-talk list has found that NIST approved
curves, which is to say NSA approved curves, were not generated by the
claimed procedure, which is a very strong indication that if you use
NIST curves in your cryptography, NSA can read your encrypted data.
As computing power
Phillip Hallam-Baker hal...@gmail.com writes:
Quite, who on earth thought DER encoding was necessary or anything other than
incredible stupidity?
At least some X.500/LDAP folks thought they could do it. Mind you, we're
talking about people who believe in X.500/LDAP here...
Peter.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:07:14AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
Therefore, everyone should use Curve25519, which we have every
reason to believe is unbreakable.
Superceded by the improved Curve1174.
http://cr.yp.to/elligator/elligator-20130527.pdf
--
Viktor.
On 2013-09-30 13:12, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
https://www.cdt.org/blogs/joseph-lorenzo-hall/2409-nist-sha-3
This makes NIST seem somehow like liars
If one lie, all lies.
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 05:12:06AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Not sure whether this has been pointed out / discussed here already (but
I guess Perry will reject my mail in case it has):
https://www.cdt.org/blogs/joseph-lorenzo-hall/2409-nist-sha-3
I call FUD. If progress is to
On 2013-09-29 23:13, Jerry Leichter wrote:
BTW, the *idea* behind DER isn't inherently bad - but the way it ended up is
another story. For a comparison, look at the encodings Knuth came up with in
the TeX world. Both dvi and pk files are extremely compact binary
representations - but
13 matches
Mail list logo
