News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:RFC 8548: Cryptographic Protection of TCP Streams (Tcpcrypt) by tptacek on Thursday May 23, 2019 @10:41PM (#19998015)
WireGuard authenticates traffic, using modern constructions, and its kernel implementation is famously fewer than 5000 lines of code, and can be implemented without dynamic allocation. Just because TLS is complicated doesn't mean that cryptographic authentication is fundamentally difficult. Watson Ladd once said, on the CFRG mailing list, that if TLS 1.1 had been turned in as an undergraduate assignment, it would have gotten a D. (I'm paraphrasing from memory).
Re:RFC 8548: Cryptographic Protection of TCP Streams (Tcpcrypt) by nullc on Sunday May 26, 2019 @01:08PM (#20015976)
> WireGuard authenticates traffic, using modern constructions

Assuming you know in advance of your connection a correct public key for the corespondent. How you got it, how you know it's correct is ... left up to you. Yet it isn't secure if its not done exactly right.

This is like arguing that a one time pad provides for unbreakable encryption. True in one sense, often not true in practice.

Re:RFC 8548: Cryptographic Protection of TCP Streams (Tcpcrypt) by crest on Friday May 24, 2019 @09:36AM (#20001274)
You conveniently ignored the 30k LOC crypto framework.