On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 11:03 +0100, Niels Möller wrote: > I've just pushed some documentation for the curve25519 and eddsa > functions. This raises a few questions on the current interfaces. > > 1. Should ecc-curves.h really declare nettle_curve25519? Its' not needed > for any of the documented functions, except for obscurities like > doing ecdsa (not eddsa) over the curve. It could be moved to > ecc-internal, or be marked as internal in some other way. Perhaps > renaming to _nettle_ed25519 would be appropriate.
A symbol that is not used can only cause issues. Using however, _nettle_ed25519 would still export the symbol with the current ld script. > 2. curve25519_mul should be changed to have a void return type (an > earlier implementation failed for inputs which didn't correspond to > points on the curve, but instead were points on its twist). But the > current implementation, using the Montgomery ladder, doesn't care and > computes a well defined result for all inputs. No idea about this, do you think that a future re-implementation could need an error code? > 3. struct ed25519_private_key and struct ed25519_public_key include > compile-time constant limb arrays. At least for the public key, this > will imply an ABI break if/when we switch to a base 2^51 > representations for GF(2^255 - 19). So maybe switch to dynamic > allocation for struct ed25519_public_key, or both structs? I'm not familiar with the other representations, but could there be a one-size fits all structure? regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ nettle-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs
