[noise] Working toward Revision 29

Trevor Perrin trevp at trevp.net
Mon May 16 11:23:22 PDT 2016

Added a few text cleanups.  I'm liking these changes, so I plan to
"officially" publish this (on website) at end-of-day, if no



On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Trevor Perrin <trevp at trevp.net> wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Rhys Weatherley
> <rhys.weatherley at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have implemented the changes for SSK and removal of XR in Noise-C as per
>> the new specification.  There were straight-forward enough.
> Cool, though I wouldn't call these changes official till I push the
> next revision to website, so let's mull this over for the weekend.
> For example: I'm not sure "secondary symmetric key" / SSK is the best
> possible name.
>> Should the use of an SSK appear in the protocol name?
> I think no.  PSK appears in the protocol name because it affects the
> sequence of crypto operations.
> SSK is like prologue - it doesn't affect the sequence of crypto, it
> just replaces a zero-length byte sequence with actual data.  So we
> don't need to name it for security.  And adding SSK isn't descriptive
> enough to fully specify the secondary protocol, so it just complicates
> the naming without gaining much.
> Trevor

More information about the Noise mailing list