Re: [P1363:] AMP proposal of Dec. 2005

[D Jablon <jablon1363@xxxxxxxxx>]

Taekyoung,

What I'd like to see right now is a motion
or two that addresses these *security*
defects in D22 AMP and D22 PAKZ by
amending Normative text in P1363.2.

After that, if there's any remaining
concern, we can make a change in the
Informative Security Considerations,
without necessarily having to vote.

No Std 1363 scheme Normative text prevents
an implentor from using it inefficiently,
or insecurely.  For example, one may
always use a field that is too-large,
or too-small.

-- David


At 10:40 PM 12/14/2005 +0900, you wrote:
>Dear David,
>
>My apology for the late reply. I am actually afraid
about ignoring issue
>(3). Unless we have mandatory constraints on domain
parameters, I think
>there are many cases that AMP+ is to be more
efficient than AMP2. I mean in
>that case, maybe we don't need to replace it with
AMP2. My proposal in the
>last teleconference was an optimization with regard
to efficiency and
>simplicity in the standard. I would like to suggest
clearing this issue as
>soon as possible. 
>
>Best regards,
>Taekyoung


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, mail LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG with
the body of the message containing: SIGNOFF STDS-P1363-DISCUSS
Send any concerns to STDS-P1363-DISCUSS-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG,
or manage subscriptions at http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa
Visit IEEE P1363 on the web at: http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1363
______________________________________________________________________