Hi,

Apologies for cross-posting LWIG and COSE. I had a brief look at 
draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations-13 and noticed it registers a lot of new 
COSE (and JOSE, PKIX, and CMS) algorithms. Has this draft been discussed in 
COSE (JOSE/CURDLE)? If not, perhaps it should be before being progressed?



  *   The draft needs to manage the overlap with NIST SP 800-186, which should 
be referenced and mappings, name of curves, etc. aligned. The draft defines 
Wei25519 and Wei448. It is unclear if these are identical to W-25519, W-448 as 
defined in NIST SP 800-186. We probably would not want two slightly different 
definitions and/or names, multiple COSE code points, etc.



  *   The draft registers the COSE algorithm "ECDSA25519" as "ECDSA with 
SHA-256 and curve Wei25519". That is not how the other COSE signature 
algorithms work. They work like PKIX where the curve is given by the public 
key. Also, why cannot W-25519 be used with the existing ES256 signature 
algorithm?


  *   The draft registers the COSE algorithm "ECDH25519". There are no COSE 
ECDH algorithms for P-256, why is an ECDH algorithm for W-25519 be needed?

Other questions. I may have missed it, but


  *   is it described what are the expected security properties of ECDSA25519 
(including mapping) compared to Ed25519? For example w.r.t. side channel 
attacks?



  *   has any performance measurements been made comparing ECDSA25519 
(including mapping) and Ed25519?



  *   similar questions on security and performance with Wei25519.-3 instead of 
Wei25519. If I understand right, the former mapping is not reversible, but 
could benefit from optimized code with hardcoded domain parameters.



  *   ANSI X9.62-2005 was withdrawn in 2015 and is behind a paywall, is this 
reference necessary?


Göran
_______________________________________________
Lwip mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip

Reply via email to