somezero

6 ms·

1.
by somezero 3mo ago
The entire argument is based on the definition of an “Incoherent cryptosystem”, which is too restrictive to be useful for cases that you want eg. Tor is also developed and distributed by Tor people and it is supposed to protect you against
2.
Bron-Crypto: A Go cryptography library focusing on MPC(github.com)
1 points by somezero 7mo ago|0 comments
3.
by somezero 11mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_omega_function https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liouville_function
4.
by somezero 1y ago
This is not just a funny joke, but also timely given the recent sanctions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_agains...
5.
2-Adic Logarithms and Fast Exponentiation(kevinventullo.com)
3 points by somezero 1y ago|0 comments
6.
by somezero 1y ago
FHE is simply the wrong tool here. FHE is for a central server operating on data held/known by another. They want MPC -multiple parties jointly computing on distributed data- and that’s fairly more efficient.
7.
by somezero 1y ago
Gauss 2.0; He’s very prolific, very famous in the math community. In this context, he is noteworthy because he’s taking automated theorem proving seriously which destigmatizes it for other pure mathematicians.
8.
by somezero 1y ago
Not sure simplicity of spec translates into simplicity of user code. This change is backward compatible and will allow things that previously were disallowed.
9.
by somezero 2y ago
People [sadly] put a lot of "exotic" cryptography/distributed systems under the term "blockchain" eg. If you want to do byzantine agreement with sub quadratic message complexity, where do you look it up? If you want
10.
by somezero 2y ago
It’s all just bytes and hashes and alike at the bottom. Absolutely nothing magical. It is the abstractions over them that makes them esoteric, not the fundamental building blocks. As to why your example isn’t zero-knowledge proof of knowled
11.
by somezero 2y ago
> zk signature schemes exist and are implied by the existence of one way functions and publicly verifiable nizk. Almost. The result is from CRYPTO89 paper of Bellare and Goldwasser. They derive a signature scheme from a nizk. It is not k
12.
by somezero 2y ago
A signature is a PoK, but not ZK.
13.
by somezero 3y ago
Sybil attacks [1] came out about a decade before the Red Balloons paper [2] or the DARPA Challenge itself [3]. It is proven in [1] that CA is necessary for a Sybil-proof system, which made people to talk about Sybil resistance eg [4] - all
14.
by somezero 3y ago
EdDSA signatures are not Schnorr signatures. A Schnorr signature is dlog proof made non interactive with fiat Shamir binded with the message, and that is equivalent/verifiable as an EdDSA signature, up to one time signing per message (
15.
by somezero 4y ago
I was a long time keepass user but moved to Bitwarden. My problem with keepass is the low quality and often poorly supported closed source clients that you get on mobile.
16.
by somezero 4y ago
This is a molecule. With a provable cryptographic property. Honestly for this one I don’t care about “real security”.
17.
Unclonable Polymers and Their Cryptographic Applications(eprint.iacr.org)
35 points by somezero 4y ago|9 comments
18.
by somezero 4y ago
Thanks! I’ll definitely take a look. These works are valuable but my problem is just with that particular claim about CAs. 1. This impossibility theorem is proved in a really broad setting (assuming a “broadcast communication cloud” and a P
19.
by somezero 4y ago
I’m not saying his paper is wrong or not up to the workshop quality. But he’s saying something against an easy-to-prove impossibility theorem in a seriously sloppy/hand-wavy way. I trust Doceur and the entire early 2000s literature mor
20.
by somezero 4y ago
The only way to provably prevent Sybil attacks are CAs ( https://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/sybil.pdf ) This is why almost all P2P and DHT papers assumed existence of a CA in their system model eg. Castro’s sec
21.
by somezero 4y ago
Sure! It’s P2P, but doesn’t need centralized certificate authorities (= Has some Sybil resistance)
22.
by somezero 5y ago
heapq exposes a minheap by default, but there is a maxheap as well that for some reason, is not exposed! Just do heapq._heapify_max
23.
by somezero 5y ago
The paper is simple and readable enough for me to not have to comment. Anyway, The abstract itself says: > This paper shows that, without a logically centralized authority, Sybil attacks are always possible except under extreme and unrea
24.
by somezero 5y ago
I'm fine with a sybil resistance mechanism (although it's not sybil-proof, and some particular forms of sybil-resistance are based on faulty models [1]) The problem is that this paper doesn't employ such mechanisms: > This
25.
by somezero 5y ago
It doesn't give you sybil-proof. It gives you sybil-resistance, and that, in a non-deterministic protocol.
26.
by somezero 5y ago
> The 3f + 1 assumption means these protocols cannot be deployed in open peer-to-peer systems, since they would be vulnerable to Sybil attacks. In contrast, my approach makes no assumption about the number of Byzantine nodes. I'm co
27.
by somezero 5y ago
It depends on the type of the work you do. Whenever I have to cast ints to floats because I want to use something in math library, I want to claw my eyes out.
28.
by somezero 5y ago
How much do your colleagues (ab)use goto statements that Go provides? :)
29.
by somezero 6y ago
Move 2 million dollars.
30.
by somezero 6y ago
So if coinbase was open source, and you had forked it to add BSV support, that’d mean coinbase was decentralized?! Open source/forkability != decentralization. The whole point of decentralization is no particular entity gets to decide

More ›