📅 Original date posted:2016-07-04
📝 Original message:> I haven't been able to find the beginning of this thread, so apologies
> if I've misunderstood what this is for, but it _sounds_ like we're
> re-inventing HKDF.
> I'd recommend reading the paper about HKDF. It stands out among crypto
> papers for having a nice clear justification for each of its design
> decisions, so you can see why they did it (very slightly) differently
> than the various constructions proposed up-thread.
Thanks Zooko
I think HKDF instead of a single HMAC_SHA512 seams reasonable and
something we should consider.
I'll try to evaluate the implications of using HKDF over HMAC_SHA512 and
will update the BIP if there are no concerns about it.
</jonas>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160704/029dc8b2/attachment.sig>;
Jonas Schnelli [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nf…3dtxs
2023-06-07 17:51:52
in reply to nevent1q…662s
Author Public Key
npub1nfrrurat393mqymf3s26pujyn5vujlem3pzcukr5p9d4qpklngxq43dtxsPublished at
2023-06-07 17:51:52Event JSON
{
"id": "baa62750ac9f0512834283b539ea125d8091bf2fb99d8f4aea67783608695bb8",
"pubkey": "9a463e0fab8963b013698c15a0f2449d19c97f3b88458e5874095b5006df9a0c",
"created_at": 1686160312,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5411372fddc2b2fd8c71c0e9a789082671451a41708cb3a5a829137d1dd19754",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"06e5ff60312ad289a941789e5dfe8626068ab89885fdf614013c0f901d763b2a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"9a463e0fab8963b013698c15a0f2449d19c97f3b88458e5874095b5006df9a0c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-07-04\n📝 Original message:\u003e I haven't been able to find the beginning of this thread, so apologies\n\u003e if I've misunderstood what this is for, but it _sounds_ like we're\n\u003e re-inventing HKDF.\n\n\u003e I'd recommend reading the paper about HKDF. It stands out among crypto\n\u003e papers for having a nice clear justification for each of its design\n\u003e decisions, so you can see why they did it (very slightly) differently\n\u003e than the various constructions proposed up-thread.\n\nThanks Zooko\n\nI think HKDF instead of a single HMAC_SHA512 seams reasonable and\nsomething we should consider.\n\nI'll try to evaluate the implications of using HKDF over HMAC_SHA512 and\nwill update the BIP if there are no concerns about it.\n\n\u003c/jonas\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 819 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160704/029dc8b2/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "020b6c1a7e05d1568008f802e8546a9e310de985b95463c0c51b66b38dedd637f165c12a088271914cf626f1c1bb6bf204b15a86e6dab2027e4ed3d081d9dd97"
}