--- Day changed Sun Feb 04 2018
07:46 < waxwing> nickler, enjoying it :) have a question but i'll pm you. gmaxwell , in 10.6.1 it shows the not-jub-jub hash function thing (well, the most rudimentary form)
07:48 < waxwing> side note, i find curious all these arguments that go: A is not broken if B is not broken, here we show that if you can break A you can break B, therefore A is secure. But what if breaking A *is* the way to break B? :)
09:50 < sipa> usually security reductions go in the form "if an algorithm to break B exist, we can invoke that algorithm to build something that breaks A, thus if A is secure then B is secure"
14:20 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
14:26 -!- Pasha [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #secp256k1     
14:28 -!- Pasha is now known as Cory     
18:08 -!- arubi_ [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #secp256k1     
18:09 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
18:25 -!- arubi_ [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
18:30 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #secp256k1     
18:35 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
19:19 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #secp256k1     
19:38 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net]     
19:46 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #secp256k1     
23:04 < waxwing> sipa, yes that's basically what i was saying. e.g. in the case of some schnorr-y thing relying on ecdlp, you're arguing that if ecdlp is not broken, schnorr-y thing is not broken. but it's a slightly weird argument when there isn't any specific thing telling you that ecdlp is not broken to begin with.
23:04 < waxwing> only *slightly* weird, i'm not saying it's wrong or stupid :)
23:09 < gmaxwell> it's a standard argument. "all eggs into one basket, if that basket is secure is someone elses problem"
23:09 < gmaxwell> in terms of division of labor it's pretty good, if you want to stop and pause and consider if your thing breaks DLP, you can do that too... just don't expect a publishable result.