search

cfrg / draft-irtf-cfrg-opaque

The OPAQUE Asymmetric PAKE Protocol
https://cfrg.github.io/draft-irtf-cfrg-opaque/draft-irtf-cfrg-opaque.html
Other
100 stars 20 forks source link

rename Evaluate() to Contribute() #53

Closed stef closed 4 years ago

stef commented 4 years ago

since github does not support reviewing markdown documents i'm submitting this as an issue:

The OPRF primitive defines a 

Evaluate(k, M): Evaluate input M using private key k.

function, semantically i think it makes more sense to call this function Contribute as this conveys better what is happening, Evaluate() is less specific to the purpose of what is happening here.

chris-wood commented 4 years ago

Can you elaborate on why Contribute is more clear? As written, I don't agree.

stef commented 4 years ago

because in an OPRF two parties collaborate to calculate a value c^s. The client (c) blinds his value c using the blinding factor r, then sends over this blinded value to the server, who contributes his value s to the computation and returns it to the client. the client then unblinds the value from the server getting as a result c^s.

stef commented 4 years ago

on another note i would also rephrase "using private key k" to "using secret key k" as the usage of "private" suggest that there is also a public key associated with this, while there isn't. and as far as i can judge for this kind of usage it is more common to refer as secret and not private keys.

chris-wood commented 4 years ago

Use of “private key” matches terminology in the OPRF dependent document. Use of Evaluate is also a result of that document. I suggest filing an issue against that repository to consider Contribute.

stef commented 4 years ago

thanks will. do.

chris-wood commented 4 years ago

Closing based on the outcome of https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-voprf/issues/140.