On 31 May 2017 at 21:46, Sam Whited <[email protected]> wrote: > Unfortunately none of us are so we do the best we can and hope that > audits will find any mistakes we've made.
I have to admit I'm somewhat sceptical on the value of audits. I appreciate that "audited code" looks good, and is very valuable when advertising in some markets, in the same way as stamping "military grade XYZ" always brings in the bucks. I also appreciate that, less cynically, it is, presumably, a code review from someone who knows the subject material. However, drop support into OpenSSL, for example, or libsodium, or BouncyCastle, and you'll get that level of review, many times over. I don't think we'll get that from XEd25519. Ed25519 on its own is well used, and slated to become even more so. As I said in the other thread, sticking with XEdDSA seems to only help us in the very short term. Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
