3

In my specifications, it doesn't matter if someone can decipher the messages. However, someone should not be able to send encrypted messages that would be recognized by the recipient. If that's the case, then encryption is the wrong solution; you are looking for a Message Authentication Code (MAC), such as CMAC. With CMAC, you hand the message and the key ...


2

I have to encrypt 64-bit messages and then send them as a 64-bit message as well. I can't afford to send more than one 64-bit encrypted message for one 64-bit unencrypted message. If that is the case, then the security that you can achieve is rather limited; you'll have to accept those limits, or find a way to allow some ciphertext expansion. One thing that ...


1

WebCrypto provides access to ECC. You don't need RSA at all. Personally I prefer to avoid RSA whenever possible. It's slow for everything but signature verification, and the keys are large. Since you're using ECDSA for signatures anyway, and not trying for legacy system compatibility, there's no reason for RSA. You can use ECDH to let users communicate, with ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible