News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by 0des on Saturday October 09, 2021 @05:46PM (#28813589)
Saying that something 'glows in the dark' implies interference, so unfortunately, within cryptography, it has become an industry term as well as metaphor.

Other examples are the 'mystery padding' in keccak vs sha3.

Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by woodruffw on Saturday October 09, 2021 @07:11PM (#28814186)
I work with a decent group of academic and industry cryptographers, and I’ve never heard any of them use the term (even as a joke.)

My main familiarity with it is from imageboard culture, where (mostly) reactionaries use it to accuse each other of being feds.

Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by Ar-Curunir on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:48PM (#28814048)
I’ve never heard a cryptographer use “glow-in-the-dark” when talking about potentially fishy schemes.

Source: am cryptographer

Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by magicalhippo on Saturday October 09, 2021 @09:17PM (#28814913)
> Saying that something 'glows in the dark' implies interference

Given that "glows in the dark" typically refers to fluorescence[1], where does the interference comes in?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence

Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by rocqua on Sunday October 10, 2021 @04:32AM (#28816782)
I know that some cryptography protocols have intermediate results that need to be deleted. This is sometimes referred to as 'radioactive waste'
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by Jensson on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:15PM (#28813796)
I read the 3 replies and I still don't know what glowing means in cryptographic terms. I even tried to google it with cryptography added but nothing.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by ajb on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:20PM (#28813843)
It means that the designer may have inserted an unpublished weakness. See also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing-up-my-sleeve_number
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by 0des on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:25PM (#28813890)
As in the case of Keccak and SHA3, it doesn't necessarily have to be the designer, it can also be the reviewing committee.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by metagame on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:32PM (#28813938)
"Glowing" means that it's probably a plot of a government. It's not cryptography-specific.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by roxaaaane on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:22PM (#28813857)
It's probably metaphorical, to mean distinguishable ?! And the term has never been used in crypto
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by smoldesu on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:24PM (#28813882)
It's imageboard/IRC slang, you won't find any documentation on it because it's an intentionally obfuscated/dogwhistle phrase intended to only 'make sense' to other browsers who've stuck around long enough to get spoonfed.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by 0des on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:28PM (#28813912)
Using the term 'dogwhistle' seems like a divisive way to discount what I said. Do you care to articulate yourself in a way that addresses the actual substance of what I said, or is this it?
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by Lammy on Saturday October 09, 2021 @09:57PM (#28815117)
Agreed that "dogwhistle" is lowkey pejorative. I prefer "shibboleth".
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by matheusmoreira on Saturday October 09, 2021 @09:30PM (#28814985)
Glowing is not cryptographic jargon. It's a word used years ago by the developer of TempleOS in a livestream to describe CIA operators. He said he could tell who was CIA because they would glow in the dark. Users of the 4chan technology board witnessed this and it became a meme.

To say something glows means to suggest the US three letter agencies are interfering with it. If some cryptography glows, it means it's been compromised by US authorities. Glowies are the operators themselves.

Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by stavros on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:39PM (#28813989)
Isn't Keccak SHA3?
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by 0des on Saturday October 09, 2021 @06:48PM (#28814051)
no, keccak is keccak, sha3 is keccak with NIST's mystery padding added in.
Re:Why Did Satoshi Decide to Use Secp256k1 Instead of Secp25... by stavros on Saturday October 09, 2021 @08:46PM (#28814747)
Oh huh, I didn't know that, thanks. Sounds like nothing fishy is going on, definitely not.