Yeah, I also wondered when I wrote that in the spec... > On 16. Sep 2019, at 20:02, Christian Grothoff <[email protected]> wrote: > > Signed PGP part > It is not intended, but AFAIK also has no security implications. > Nevertheless, we should probably plan to fix the swap when we next break > compatibility. > > On 9/16/19 7:35 PM, Bernd Fix wrote: >> The function "derive_block_aes_key" in "gnsrecord_crypto.c" swaps the >> arguments for "key" and "salt" in the calls of "hkdf" - is that intented? >> >> If so, what is the rationale behind it? It is done correctly in the >> derivation functions for keys, so I wonder... the entropy of the key >> (~255) is much higher than that of the salt (~50 for a 12-letter label). >> Does that have security implications? >Y< >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNUnet-developers mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers >> > > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
