3 ms·
I'm only a crypto hobbyist, so I haven't followed the field (side-channel attacks on ECC) too closely. Still, the authors themselves address ECC and not jus ECD
by ge0rg 11y ago
I'm only a crypto hobbyist, so I haven't followed the field (side-channel attacks on ECC) too closely. Still, the authors themselves address ECC and not jus ECDSA in the related work section, and I considered Curve/Ed-25519 to be a sufficiently important contribution to the field to at least mention it.
One way or the other, this is really impressive work and it shows yet another reason to avoid ECDSA, unless you are a crypto rocket surgeon.
- tptacek 11y agoAgain: Ed25519 isn't ECDSA. Not just different curves, but different signature constructions. Curve25519 and ECDSA are orthogonal. I'd have disagreed with your comment even if you had said "Ed25519" instead of "Curve25519", but I especially disagree with the comment you actually wrote.
- ge0rg 11y agoThanks for the clarification. While I am aware that Curve25519 is not Ed25519 is not ECDSA, they all at least belong into the field of Elliptic Curve Cryptography. It is hard for an outsider to tell how wide a certain sub-field is, and how far the related work research should go. I merely took the hints from the paper, which addressed ECC in some places, and wrongfully concluded that DJB's research would be still on topic.