A simple, (as-of-yet unidentified) asymmetric Authenticated Key Exchange

Re:A simple, (as-of-yet unidentified) asymmetric Authenticat... by layer8 on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @06:12PM (#39833446)

Yeah, from the requirements it’s not clear why you wouldn’t just use TLS.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A simple, (as-of-yet unidentified) asymmetric Authenticat... by mike_d on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @06:48PM (#39833711)

This. Even if TLS is the wrong answer, it will always be better than anything you roll yourself.

Shout out to https://www.trustedfirmware.org/projects/mbed-tls/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A simple, (as-of-yet unidentified) asymmetric Authenticat... by cobratbq on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @09:36PM (#39834827)

Thanks for the feedback. See also comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39834820 Note that this device is general purpose security device with no persistence. So the requirements were really specific for that reason.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A simple, (as-of-yet unidentified) asymmetric Authenticat... by cobratbq on Tuesday March 26, 2024 @10:39PM (#39835173)

You're right. I wanted to abstract away from specific hardware and express that in the requirements. I definitely failed at that. See other comments for specifics and details on the device.

[ Parent | on HN ]