Cryptography Google, INRIA, Mozilla, MIT, Twitter, and Wire are working on a Messaging Layer Security (MLS) Architecture |
- Google, INRIA, Mozilla, MIT, Twitter, and Wire are working on a Messaging Layer Security (MLS) Architecture
- Simon and Speck probably deeply flawed (detailed information about ISO meetings)
- Crypography (And Pentesting) Discord server
- Crypto Novel Question
| Posted: 02 Jun 2018 11:14 AM PDT |
| Simon and Speck probably deeply flawed (detailed information about ISO meetings) Posted: 02 Jun 2018 12:04 PM PDT Low security margins, promotion by the same guy as DUAL_EC, suspicious behavior and refusal to cooperate: [link] [comments]  |
| Crypography (And Pentesting) Discord server Posted: 02 Jun 2018 04:46 PM PDT Hi there I've owned a discord server for a couple months now that has a focus on multiple topics. First, there was music production, then art, then DJing, and then technology. We've recently added a Pentesting section to our server. I decided to post an invite here because we want more people who are into technology (and more specifically pentesting) on the server. There's also dedicated cryptography channels. This might sound very cluttered, but trust me, it's organized well. You won't see any channels about stuff that you aren't interested in. Feel free to join us and hang around. Our community is pretty good. The invite link is Here [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 02 Jun 2018 03:34 PM PDT I'm writing a scifi trilogy set in the future and have a strong crypto question. Humans use androids for menial tasks and control the firmware update process. But through an accident during a brainmesh experiment of human and android minds, the androids become sentient and self-aware. They want control of their own firmware. What kind of crypto can I describe where the two sides are at a stalemate as any updates require the knowledge and consent of both groups? Is that symmetric crypto? I think symmetric means both sides have the same key, so I don't think so. Would it be more of a blockchain ledger situation? Or the firmware updates simply require both digital signatures? One side eventually thwarts the other to get full control, so I'm thinking it requires both digital signatures but somehow one group gets control of other's private key. [link] [comments]  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Cryptography news and discussions. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment