----- Original Message -----
From: "Johannes Merkle" <[email protected]>
To: "t.petch" <[email protected]>; "Warren Kumari" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; "Scott Bradner" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:53 PM

> Tom,
>
> >>> > > s9.2
> >>> > > is it the length of the key that gives it strength or its
entropy?
> >>> > > Is
abcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcdabcd0004
> >>> > > really stronger than !qaurk/99SS~ ?
> >> >
> >> > Strictly speaking, you are right, but it is common sense that
> > cryptographic keys should have maximum entropy, i.e., they
> >> > should be selected uniformly at random from bit string of that
length.
> > Consequently, virtually all cryptographic papers
> >> > and text books use key the key length synonymous to its entropy.
Thus,
> > I consider this distinction as unnecessary.
> >
> > Yes but, consider the audience.  Cryptographic material is aimed at
> > cryptographers who know about entropy without being told, the
audience
> > of this I-D is all sorts, including MIB module specialists whose
> > knowledge of cryptography is probably less than useless.  So I think
> > 'length' is wrong, 'entropy' is probably too technical (especially
if,
> > like me, Thermodynamics was part of your degree), RFC5310 uses 'size
and
> > quality of the key' which is probably a good compromise.
> >
>
> This section is about the influences of the cryptographic parameters
of HMAC on the security.
> The entropy or quality (I don't like that term) of the key is not a
parameter, thus, it is not appropriate to mention is
> along the size. I suggest the following wording:
>
>   The security of each HMAC-SHA-2 authentication protocol depends on
the parameters
>   used in the corresponding HMAC computation, which are the length of
the key
>   (if the key has maximum entropy), the size of the [...]

OK,

Tom Petch


> Rational: If the key's entropy is not maximal, the length does not
necessarily influence the the security.
> abcdabcdabcdabcdabcd is not necessarily more secure than
abcdabcdabcdabcd. At least, the key length is not a primary
> parameter in this case. On the other hand, it is best cryptographic
practice to choose keys uniformly at random, so that
> their entropy is maximal.
>
> --
> Johannes

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

Reply via email to