[Standards] OMEMO Key Agreement
ignat.gavrilov at mailfence.com
Wed May 31 20:37:47 UTC 2017
> "Remko Tronçon" <remko at el-tramo.be> wrote:
> On 31 May 2017 at 20:26, Chris Ballinger <chrisballinger at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What if instead of all this, we just funded a liberally licensed XEdDSA
>> reference implementation and got it audited?
> To be honest, I still think it'd be suboptimal. It would make the XEP still
> dependent on a single (liberal) reference implementation, in a single
> language. I'd much rather depend on standards that are widely accepted and
> available, to give OMEMO the broadest chance of implementation and
Seriously? I thought your problem is that you don't like (I guess for license
reasons) the libsignal implementations. How can you argue there is still a
dependency on a *single* library, when the proposal is to fund another library
that suits your requirement.
If this helps standardization, I'd happily help funding an audit and/or help
Von: ignat.gavrilov at mailfence.com
Bis: "XMPP Standards" <standards at xmpp.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 814 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Standards