📅 Original date posted:2014-03-05
📝 Original message:> On Mar 5, 2014, at 8:56 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
>> I am not currently aware of any efforts to make OpenSSL's secp256k1
>> implementation completely side channel free in all aspects. Also,
>> unfortunately many people have reimplemented ECDSA themselves and even if
>> OpenSSL gets fixed, the custom implementations probably won't.
>
> As far as I know, judging from the implementation, there is hardly any
> effort to try to prevent timing attacks.
>
Is it safe to assume that this is also true for your secp256k1 implementation?
jp
> --
> Pieter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce.
> With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works.
> Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the
> freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Jean-Paul Kogelman [ARCHIVE] /
npub1sa…8y304
2023-06-07 15:14:41
in reply to nevent1q…ysey
Author Public Key
npub1sa86gng3pvs3jgyt5majwcrhn8ck5qxgy9pjqxkh79u638cd7dys28y304Published at
2023-06-07 15:14:41Event JSON
{
"id": "fd36b82bf3f41f8493fb6e8d48c8bd585e4cb7624b6940e6de6bb79866f672a7",
"pubkey": "874fa44d110b2119208ba6fb27607799f16a00c82143201ad7f179a89f0df349",
"created_at": 1686150881,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d46bd1a40c3d916ca1e2c015ea0a2210ec8d4fdd9116c09aec6725abac0dd67f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"510437f29e0c849fe677168a7d848ed22d28e80f7b29be99c9204c6f04f265da",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-03-05\n📝 Original message:\u003e On Mar 5, 2014, at 8:56 PM, Pieter Wuille \u003cpieter.wuille at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I am not currently aware of any efforts to make OpenSSL's secp256k1\n\u003e\u003e implementation completely side channel free in all aspects. Also,\n\u003e\u003e unfortunately many people have reimplemented ECDSA themselves and even if\n\u003e\u003e OpenSSL gets fixed, the custom implementations probably won't.\n\u003e \n\u003e As far as I know, judging from the implementation, there is hardly any\n\u003e effort to try to prevent timing attacks.\n\u003e \n\nIs it safe to assume that this is also true for your secp256k1 implementation?\n\njp\n\n\n\u003e -- \n\u003e Pieter\n\u003e \n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion \u0026 Make the Move to Perforce.\n\u003e With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. \n\u003e Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the\n\u003e freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce.\n\u003e http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951\u0026iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development",
"sig": "cfa7f6903b93ba576100ac4dc28b83aa6d165c8d9900ebdbdfa1bfc487a7630d8811e7e3df2a29085cce6808a4ddf10d4ca3da40e257ce612cca2543c17508b3"
}