DSA was the mandatory to implement algorithm originally since that was out of patent earlier than RSA.
I would like to kill as many unused crypto implementations as possible. The algorithm might be sound but an implementation that has never been used in practice is a huge liability. On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Peter Gutmann <pgut...@cs.auckland.ac.nz> wrote: > Ryan Sleevi <ryan-mozdevsecpol...@sleevi.com> writes: > > >(and for sure, Microsoft's stack _does_ implement it, > > Does anyone know the motivation for this? MS also implemented support for > X9.42 certificates, which no-one has ever seen in the wild, but it was in > receive-only mode (it would never generate data using them) and was done > solely in order to avoid any accusations that they weren't following > standards > (there was this antitrust thing going on at the time). So having it > present > in a MS implementation doesn't necessarily mean that it's used or > supported, > merely that it's, well, present in a MS implementation. > > (I'm just curious, wondering what the story behind this one is). > > Peter. > _______________________________________________ > dev-security-policy mailing list > dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy > _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
