[GNUnet-developers] ECDSA vs. EDDSA
Hi! While I understand that ECDHE is needed for EC encryption, I can't quite fathom why we use both ECDSA and EDDSA in GNUnet, for they seem to be addressing the signatures with the notable difference between them being radomized vs. deterministic signatures respectively. Are there any other reasons behind using both of them? Regards, Sree ___ GNUnet-developers mailing list GNUnet-developers@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
Re: [GNUnet-developers] ECDSA vs. EDDSA
On Fri, 2016-01-08 at 18:40 +0100, Sree Harsha Totakura wrote: > While I understand that ECDHE is needed for EC encryption, I can't > quite > fathom why we use both ECDSA and EDDSA in GNUnet, for they seem to be > addressing the signatures with the notable difference between them > being > radomized vs. deterministic signatures respectively. > > Are there any other reasons behind using both of them? I'd imagine Christian may give a better or more specific answer, but.. It's much harder to screw up using EdDSA signatures, so the code that uses them is more robust and requires less careful review. Afaik ECDSA is only used in GNS to accommodate GNS's specific key blinding approach. Jeff signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ GNUnet-developers mailing list GNUnet-developers@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
Re: [GNUnet-developers] ECDSA vs. EDDSA
On 01/08/2016 06:45 PM, Jeff Burdges wrote: > I'd imagine Christian may give a better or more specific answer, but.. > > It's much harder to screw up using EdDSA signatures, so the code that > uses them is more robust and requires less careful review. > > Afaik ECDSA is only used in GNS to accommodate GNS's specific key > blinding approach. That's correct, there is nothing for me to be add here. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ GNUnet-developers mailing list GNUnet-developers@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
