[noise] New test vectors

Alex alex at centromere.net
Fri May 20 07:01:07 PDT 2016

On Fri, 20 May 2016 00:57:14 -0700
Trevor Perrin <trevp at trevp.net> wrote:

> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Alex <alex at centromere.net> wrote:
> >
> > What I like best about the current format is how well it
> > generalizes to all handshake patterns. In the case of SSK
> > generality is not broken -- the "init_ssk" and "resp_ssk" keys can
> > be safely ignored if they are not understood.  
> I'm probably misunderstanding:  but you can't skip the SSK and still
> expect to calculate the correct transport messages, of course.

Upon re-reading what I wrote I realize that my statement was
misleading. I meant to say that the JSON keys "init_ssk" and "resp_ssk"
are applicable (if defined) to all handshake patterns always and
everywhere. In other words, there is no rule which states, "SSKs apply
to all handshake patterns /except/ XX and NN because foobar". This is
what I mean when I say, "generalizes to all handshake patterns".

It's precisely this generalization which keeps the resulting code
concise and readable.

> We could probably generalize and formalize the idea behind Noise Pipes
> a little more, and that might help us answer this.

I've always interpreted Noise Pipes as being a higher level feature
whose semantics are defined by the application, not by the Noise


More information about the Noise mailing list