[tor-dev] Proposing "Post-Quantum safe handshake implementation" as GSoc Project
yawning at schwanenlied.me
Thu Feb 23 00:26:47 UTC 2017
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 00:01:29 +0000
isis agora lovecruft <isis at torproject.org> wrote:
> > The bad news is that, work on it is on going, and it does not make a
> > good GSOC project because, the bulk of the implementation work will
> > likely happen before the summer.
> It will?
Probably? If people take what I say out of context, or as a promise of
anything, they may end up disappointed, but I don't really care.
> > > 2. Implement the NewHope-Simple algorithm because we'll not be
> > > able to use the Vanilla NewHope as it is protected by some
> > > patents. I wasn't able to find any implementation of NewHope
> > > Simple. So can the Vanilla NewHope Implementation be tweaked to
> > > convert it into NewHope Simple? Or would we have to write it from
> > > ground up? I don't know about the patent laws regarding it.
> > I haven't talked to Peter in a while (and will ask him after I send
> > this), but I am not aware of any patent claims against the vanilla
> > NewHope algorithm (and the NewHope-Simple paper does not mention
> > this at all either).
> Sorry, I'm being deliberately vague about this because I don't want
> to feed the patent trolls or provide a weapon to anyone who wants to
> fight against good crypto, but the patent exists, and it affects
> nearly all lattice-based handshakes. NewHope simple is not affected.
I spoke with some people and got filled in. I'm not going to look at
the claim, because that's something for a legal department somewhere to
sort out, and not my problem.
Since the Simple variant is easier for others to implement, and
sidesteps the random asshats issue, I don't think this is a big deal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the tor-dev