Timeline for Is there a scheme to enforce a random seed without leaking the seed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 20:27 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 170 characters in body
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 18:15 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 17:57 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 17:52 | comment | added | knaccc | @lukasl I realised that it's possible to do $(e+e')\ mod\ 2^{128}$ and preserve the uniform distribution of $s$. I've updated the answer. | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 17:51 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1073 characters in body
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 14:44 | comment | added | knaccc | @lukasl that's a really good point. I have asked the question here: crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/101077/… | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 11:25 | vote | accept | lukasl | ||
| Jul 19, 2022 at 10:32 | comment | added | lukasl | I appreciate that this scheme also prevents offline brute forcing of the client entropy. However, it should be noted that s is not uniformly distributed, because it is the sum of two uniformly distributed variables. Is the security better or equal to a 127 bit uniformly random key? It would be easy to add some more bits of entropy if needed. | |
| Jul 18, 2022 at 3:14 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| Jul 18, 2022 at 2:37 | history | edited | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| Jul 18, 2022 at 2:18 | history | answered | knaccc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |