Hi Ignat, So just for the record (because you didn't answer that question from my > previous mail): > This is only an implementation detail and has no relevant influence (aka, > at most constant factor) on the cryptographic properties? >
I'm not a cryptographer, but as far as my knowledge goes, this is correct. > When changing the identity keys to Ed, will that mean that existing > fingerprints will become invalid? > The keys (and so existing authentications) stay valid, but if there would have been fingerprints printed, these would indeed become invalid. I'm not sure if printing fingerprints is something that is done in practice today with OMEMO anyway (as opposed to PGP). That said, I think we still want to have a discussion at some point on how to do fingerprinting anyway: verify each others public keys byte-by-byte (what OMEMO clients do today), or create a shared fingerprint (like what user-friendly clients like Signal do). Not that I have a strong opinion on either. Also, as you seem to be very concered about implementation details, > I'm not 'just' concerned about technical ability of creating independent implementations with reasonable effort, I'm also concerned about licensing and legal issues. (see other thread(s); I'd like to avoid this discussion in this thread and focus on the technical details of this compromise). > libsodium is native code only All the primitives used are available in many languages, including Java. Libsodium was just an example. Remko
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
