Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> writes: > Why is that? Is it because you re-use code that is also used by > signing?
Exactly, for now I stick to using the same primitives. > Maybe it makes sense to implement the time consuming functions > in a side-channel leaky (but faster) way for use with verify? It will > make the code somewhat bigger, but I'm not sure anyone cares. It would certainly make sense to use separate functions for verifying (or other computations on public values only), but I think I'd like to integrate the current code in Nettle first. And there are other possible optimizations too, so I think one should go for the lowest hanging fruit first. > Btw, it would be nice to compare with GnuTLS' ECDSA as well, it contains > some nice optimizations. Do you have an example on how to do that? Corresponding to the (quite ugly) openssl interface at https://www.openssl.org/docs/crypto/ecdsa.html, including an almost working example. I have to admit that I'm not very familiar with gnutls, so I'm probably not looking at the right places. Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. _______________________________________________ nettle-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs
