I2P_Developers/i2p.www
3
0
Fork 5
Code Issues 27 Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Prop. 152 minor fixes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
zzz
2020-10-26 14:39:08 -04:00
parent e0fb0db0cc
commit 6406b93e21
1 changed files with 4 additions and 3 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

7
i2p2www/spec/proposals/152-ecies-tunnels.rst
View File

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ ECIES Tunnels
:author: chisana, zzz, orignal
:created: 2019-07-04
:thread: http://zzz.i2p/topics/2737
:lastupdated: 2020-10-25
:lastupdated: 2020-10-26
:status: Open
:target: 0.9.51
@@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ Summary of changes:
- Unencrypted record is longer because there is less encryption overhead
The request record does not contain any explicit tunnel or reply keys.
The request record does not contain any ChaCha reply keys.
Those keys are derived from a KDF. See below.
All fields are big-endian.
@@ -592,7 +592,8 @@ Request Record Keys (ECIES)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
These keys are explicitly included in ElGamal BuildRequestRecords.
For ECIES BuildRequestRecords, these keys are derived from the DH exchange.
For ECIES BuildRequestRecords, the tunnel keys and AES reply keys are included,
but the ChaCha reply keys are derived from the DH exchange.
See [Prop156]_ for details of the router static ECIES keys.
Below is a description of how to derive the keys previously transmitted in request records.