Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email protected]> writes:

> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Ilari Liusvaara <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:27:09AM -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> > I would much rather block the entire class of attacks rather than spend
>> any
>> > time working out if there is a way to do this with ECC based keys.
>>
>> FYI, one of the five proposals for CFRG signatures:
>> - One is definitely vulernable (and key-checking won't help).
>> - Two are definitely not vulernable.
>> - Two I don't know.
>>
>> So good idea to just block the attack.
>
> I hadn't actually thought of using this as a discrimination function on the
> CFRG algorithms. It is as good as anything else.

This is not a good discriminator of the CFRG options -- this problem is
a weakness in this protocol, and should be addressed here.

/Simon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme

Reply via email to