@BRIAN_____ @tqbf It wasn't us who proposed this "there can be only one" CFRG process.
-
-
Replying to @BRIAN_____
@BRIAN_____@tqbf this captures the "anyone who proposes anything other than 25519 is being unhelpful" argument nicely2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @marshray
@marshray@BRIAN_____@tqbf Microsoft may have had good intentions but to an outsider it really feels like they were obstructing the CFRG2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@brian_____@tqbf a lot of folks seemed to define obstructing as "Proposing something other than 25519"1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @marshray
@marshray@BRIAN_____@tqbf do you think it makes sense for Microsoft to be pushing short Weierstrass curves?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@brian_____@tqbf I don't know. I think the quality of specification and library implementation matters far more.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @marshray
@marshray@BRIAN_____@tqbf Weierstrass is harder to implement and has more wiggle room for fuck-ups. Yet that's what Microsoft pushed...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@marshray@BRIAN_____@tqbf the rest of the ECC world had mostly moved onto Montgomery/Edwards by that point...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@marshray @BRIAN_____ @tqbf Microsoft eventually came around and got on the Edwards bandwagon but had... weird ideas about rigidity
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.