Rewrite mention of replay attacks in nonce section #522
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
divergentdave
requested review from
bifurcation,
cjpatton and
schoppmp
as code owners
cjpatton
reviewed
Nov 2, 2024
cjpatton
force-pushed
the
david/remove-over-exposing
branch
from
73e2e30 to
9273337
Compare
divergentdave
force-pushed
the
david/remove-over-exposing
branch
from
9273337 to
61698b0
Compare
cjpatton
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current text here seems too permissive about processing a report more than once, given that two sections below we say that "DAFs and VDAFs may impose restrictions on the re-use of reports". This PR strengthens the text leading into the recommendation to make use of the nonce in replay protections.