Timeline for ElGamal: Generation of "g" value?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2013 at 14:33 | comment | added | Chris C | Thanks for the additional information! I had seen the use of 2 in several papers. | |
| Apr 13, 2013 at 10:46 | comment | added | Henrick Hellström | The efficiency gains from having $g = 2$ depends on how modular exponentiation is implemented. You will get maximum effect if you use left-to-right exponentiation and replace multiplication by $g$ with adding the intermediary result with itself, subtract $p$ and pick that difference as the intermediary result if it is non-negative. | |
| Apr 13, 2013 at 0:31 | comment | added | Barack Obama | I have experienced people being quite negative about efficiency gains from having $g=2$. I haven't investigated so I have no opinion. Also, I found abc's answer to this post which would lead people (wrongly) to believe that $g=2$ is insecure for signatures in all cases. Perhaps you may care to leave a comment on the linked question to set the record straight for posterity. You have the gravitas I do not.. (yet!) | |
| Apr 13, 2013 at 0:14 | history | answered | poncho | CC BY-SA 3.0 |