I've used the terms symmetric/asymmetric PAKEs so far in my book because I prefer them. But do you prefer the terms balanced/augmented PAKEs?
-
-
Replying to @cryptodavidw
Symmetric/asymmetric is confusing to me, because they are already established terms that mean something different.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dchest
would this be the first use of the word symmetric in a public-key crypto algorithm?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cryptodavidw
That’s the point: I would have though someone broke the Universe and came up with PAKE using AES or something instead of public-key crypto
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dchest @cryptodavidw
But I also dislike the word “augmented” (“balanced” seems fine)...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dchest
yeah I really dislike augmented as well, that's why I chose asymmetric/symmetric
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
As much as I don’t like balanced/augmented either, using a different terminology than what is commonly used in existing documents could be even more confusing.
-
-
the terms asymmetric and symmetric are currently used as well, as far as I know only the CFRG was using balanced/augmented?
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.