> Jonathan Katz wrote: >>>> [2] http://www.cs.umd.edu/~jkatz/papers/dh-sigs-full.pdf
>> On the other hand, there is one published scheme that >> gives a slight improvement to our paper (it has fewer >> on-line computations): it is a paper by Chevallier-Mames >> in Crypto 2005 titled "An Efficient CDH-Based Signature >> Scheme with a Tight Security Reduction". On 2010-04-23 7:57 PM, Paul Crowley wrote: > My preferred signature scheme is the second, DDH-based one > in the linked paper, since it produces shorter signatures - > are there any proposals which improve on that? If you want shorter signatures, the proposed scheme does not beat the Boneh, Lynn and Shacham proposal "Short Signatures from the Weil Pairing", which the Chevallier-Mames paper mentions and cites. _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
