bear at sonic.net
Fri Mar 20 19:53:26 EDT 2015
On 03/20/2015 06:11 AM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> I abhor the term "perfect forward secrecy", as being inaccurate unless
> an OTP is used for perfection -
> I propose instead the term Full Forward Secrecy, and the corresponding
> acronym FFS, to describe a system where an OTP is not used, and the
> secrecy is based on some sort of computational complexity, whether real
> or imagined, instead.
I feel compelled to ask what purpose is served by the adjective placed
before the term "Forward Secrecy?" Because I've been preferring to use
it with no adjective for as long as I've been using the term.
The only circumstance in which an adjective is needed is in describing
partial forward secrecy - and in that case the 'default' form of forward
secrecy still needs no adjective.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the cryptography