On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 03:29:58PM +0200, meskio wrote:
Quoting David Fifield (2024-08-21 06:03:26)
A coupld of forthcoming papers are using "Lyrebird" as if it were the name of a protocol, a synonym for obfs4:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13310
Obfs4/Lyrebird is based on Scramblesuit [56].
https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/1086
The obfs4/lyrebird protocol, specified in [60], is separated into two distinct phases:
This, to me, seems like an incorrect use of terminology. I am planning to tell the authors so. But I just want to check that my understanding matches the consensus opinion, which I would summarize thus:
There is no such thing as a "lyrebird" protocol. Lyrebird is a program that implements several protocols, including obfs3, obfs4, and meek. Lyrebird is a fork of obfs4proxy, which likewise is a program, not a protocol. Just as there is no "lyrebird" protocol, there is no "obfs4proxy" protocol; these are names of programs that both happen to implement an identical protocol, which protocol is called obfs4.
Yes, your description matches my understanding of it. I was pushing for a rename to something not obfs4 to avoid that confusion, but as you say it looks like it creates it's own confusion.
Thank you for looking into it.
I sent some emails to the authors.
One of them pointed me to this already published FOCI extended abstract that has a similar confusion.
https://www.petsymposium.org/foci/2024/foci-2024-0004.php
lyrebird (obfs4). Previously known as obfs4, lyrebird is...