Skip to content

Conversation

yaksetig
Copy link

@yaksetig yaksetig commented Apr 13, 2022

Hey! Came across your project and just wanted to say thanks and let you know how valuable the work you are doing is!

Quick note: Today I was reading the SHA256 example on your website and I believe I may have come across a little error in the explanation.

"Peggy wants to prove that she knows a preimage for a digest chosen by Victor, without revealing what the preimage is"

My first intuition after reading this, given this phrasing, is that such a statement is not even really feasible. The setting as is basically implies that Alice must perform a (second) preimage attack, or assumes that Victor knows a list of digests controlled by Alice. The first one is basically impossible, and the second is not mentioned in the text.

I know that explaining this type of thing is always extremely hard and I may be overcomplicating my take of this writeup, but just wanted to leave a comment regardless.

PS: This pull request basically contains what I would consider to be a more cryptographically correct phrasing, but do not feel like this is what an ideal correction would look like.

Hey! Came across your project and just wanted to say thanks and let you know how valuable the work you are doing is!

Quick note: Today I was reading the SHA256 example on your website and I believe I may have come across a little error in the explanation.

"Peggy wants to prove that she knows a preimage for a digest chosen by Victor, without revealing what the preimage is"

My first intuition after reading this, given this phrasing, is that such a statement is not even really feasible. The setting as is basically forces Alice to perform a (second) preimage attack and find a preimage, or assumes that Victor knows a list of digests controlled by Alice. The first one is basically impossible, and the second is not mentioned in the text.

I know that explaining this type of thing is always extremely hard and I may be overcomplicating my take of this writeup, but just wanted to leave a comment regardless.

PS: This pull request basically contains what I would consider to be a more cryptographically correct phrasing, but do not feel like this is what an ideal correction would look like.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant