On Thu, 12 May 2016 03:48:21 +
isis wrote:
[snippity[
> This is an interesting idea. Let me just make sure I've understood
> correctly. In your idea, it goes like this?
Almost.
Let Seal(key, nonce, plaintext) be the forward
GCM-AES128/XChaCha20Poly1305/whatever encrypt operation, with the
s
Yawning Angel transcribed 2.5K bytes:
> Hello,
>
> My tinfoil hat went crinkle in the night[0], and I had an additional
> thought here. Should we encrypt the `CLIENT_NEWHOPE` and
> `SERVER_NEWHOPE` values using and
> something derived from `EXP(Z,x)`/`EXP(X,z)`?
>
> It doesn't have perfect forwa
Hello,
My tinfoil hat went crinkle in the night[0], and I had an additional
thought here. Should we encrypt the `CLIENT_NEWHOPE` and
`SERVER_NEWHOPE` values using and
something derived from `EXP(Z,x)`/`EXP(X,z)`?
It doesn't have perfect forward secrecy (compromise of `z` would allow
the adversar
> On 11 May 2016, at 12:49, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11 May 2016, at 12:38, Nicholas R. Parker (RIT Student)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey again all, got another one for you.
>> When we've started adding bridges to the network, they send a warning
>> "Publishing server descriptor to
> On 11 May 2016, at 12:38, Nicholas R. Parker (RIT Student)
> wrote:
>
> Hey again all, got another one for you.
> When we've started adding bridges to the network, they send a warning
> "Publishing server descriptor to directory authorities of type 'Bridge', but
> no authorities of that typ
Hey again all, got another one for you.
When we've started adding bridges to the network, they send a warning
"Publishing server descriptor to directory authorities of type 'Bridge',
but no authorities of that type listed!"
Not sure how to have a directory authority as a bridge type given that if
