Re: [P1619-2] EME-2 definition/choice of M1 in middle layer mask update

[Matt Ball <matthew.v.ball@xxxxxxxxx>]

We need to make sure that these comments are included in the outstanding sponsor ballot before it closes.  I can submit these comments as 'Rogue Comments', unless someone else in the sponsor ballot pool would like to submit them instead.  Can someone summarize the issues into a brief list?

The other issue is that if we decide to create additional test vectors, we need a volunteer to produce such test vectors, and another volunteer to independently verify.  Are there any takers for producing the test vectors?

Thanks!
-Matt

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Shai Halevi <shaih@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Finally, I'll just reiterate that, from a standards viewpoint, the test
> vector coverage is not good enough, because the longest 2065 bytes vector
> does not test Mi computation or usage for i >= 2, which is different to
> the i=1 computation. It is /necessary/ to have a 258.x block vector to
> get full coverage of the branches of the algorithm.

I agree. -- Shai

-- 
Thanks!

Matt Ball, Chair, IEEE P1619 Security in Storage Working Group
Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
500 Eldorado Blvd, Bldg #5 BRM05-212, Broomfield, CO 80021
Work: 303-272-7580, Cell: 303-717-2717