A seriously overlooked weak spot of cryptography engineering, that could be discussed in next editions of @veorq "Serious Crypto": hashing / HMAC-ing / signing multiple, variable-length data with a single call to the primitive. In a nutshell: serialise data or you'll get doomed.
-
Show this thread
-
-
Replying to @carrickdb @veorq
Here is a small example: I'd like to sign an object that is either a Python array of 3 shorts or a Python array of 6 bytes. Do you expect the same signature ? Let's first hash them:pic.twitter.com/9YdNWrrFTP
4 replies 3 retweets 7 likes -
Oh gosh do people do that?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I've seen cases of trivial encoding justified as "it's all constant-length aint a problem", until in a later release contant becomes variable.. related problem: projects creating their own serialization format and writing unsafe deserializers.. protobuf/flatbuffers usually ok..
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
Recommend CBOR. Compact. Standard. Good implementations available. Not too horrible for a standard.
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.