Are !EdwardsPoint::is_small_order
and EdwardsPoint::is_torsion_free
equivalent?
#771
Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
Well I should have at least attempted to find a counterexample to the above dual-implication. Had I, I would have found that the dual-implication is not true. Specifically, even if an I haven't been able to generate an
and I did spend some time generating |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Well since the Curve25519 group has order 8q where q = 2^252+27742317777372353535851937790883648493; there are obviously points that are neither small-order nor in the prime-order subgroup. Furthermore, as one of the maintainers explains in their blog:
From above it must be the case that, excluding the identity, Z/qZ (i.e., the prime-order subgroup) and Z/8Z (i.e., the small-order subgroup) are mutually exclusive. Thus |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Does
!EdwardsPoint::is_small_order
⇔EdwardsPoint::is_torsion_free
? If not, does one direction hold?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions