Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode

To: P1619-2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
From: Shai Halevi <shaih@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:00:30 -0400
In-Reply-To: <ed843b100806181633w46c863d8k1457cf312baac429@mail.gmail.com>
List-Help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=P1619-2>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20P1619-2>
List-Owner: <mailto:P1619-2-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
References: <485829FF.2050101@alum.mit.edu> <da7b3ce30806171508l3bfdcc7cwc78e22d59628691f@mail.gmail.com> <ed843b100806171644w2024120ke7986a6771b2bff4@mail.gmail.com> <da7b3ce30806181534o4012093bma81f13c7a799aef6@mail.gmail.com> <ed843b100806181633w46c863d8k1457cf312baac429@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: Shai Halevi <shaih@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

As a concrete proposal, I suggest to change 1,0,0,... in the spec to
0x80,0,0,... so as to match the reference code. This way we don't need
to generate new test vectors.

-- Shai

References:
- [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
  - From: Shai Halevi
- Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
  - From: Hal Finney
- Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
  - From: Matt Ball
- Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
  - From: Hal Finney
- Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
  - From: Matt Ball

Prev by Date: [P1619-2] Minutes posted (2008-06-17)
Next by Date: Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
Prev by thread: Re: [P1619-2] the EME2 ref code vs. byte-oriented pseudocode
Next by thread: [P1619-2] links to recent papers on "keys encrypting themselves"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread