commit 357aeb27a5282bceebe963a493f240cb27ca0b38 Author: George Kadianakis desnacked@riseup.net Date: Tue Jul 3 17:05:55 2018 +0300
Add some future alternative approaches to the SRV spec. --- srv-spec.txt | 22 ++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/srv-spec.txt b/srv-spec.txt index 4f99b0f..eaf2bda 100644 --- a/srv-spec.txt +++ b/srv-spec.txt @@ -73,10 +73,6 @@ Tor works. This text used to be proposal 250-commit-reveal-consensus.txt. Hence, this proposal aims to embed the commit-and-reveal idea in the Tor voting process which should make it smoother to deploy and maintain.
- Another idea proposed specifically for Tor is Nick Hopper's "A threshold - signature-based proposal for a shared RNG" which was never turned into an - actual Tor proposal. - 2. Overview
This proposal alters the Tor consensus protocol such that a random number is @@ -514,8 +510,13 @@ Tor works. This text used to be proposal 250-commit-reveal-consensus.txt. crypto and more complex protocols so this seems like an acceptable solution for now.
- For alternative approaches on collaborative random number generation also - see the discussion at [RNGMESSAGING]. + Here are some examples of possible future directions: + - Schemes based on threshold signatures (e.g. see [HOPPER]) + - Unicorn scheme by Lenstra et al. [UNICORN] + - Schemes based on Verifiable Delay Functions [VDFS] + + For more alternative approaches on collaborative random number generation + also see the discussion at [RNGMESSAGING].
5.2. Predicting the shared random value during reveal phase
@@ -637,3 +638,12 @@ References:
[RNGMESSAGING]: https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2015/002032.html + +[HOPPER]: + https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2014-January/006053.html + +[UNICORN]: + https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/366.pdf + +[VDFS]: + https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/601.pdf