4 comments

Sign in to comment.

raf131 month ago
Seven of AES’s ten rounds is exactly the sort of thing cryptographers call “not in production.” The $100k figure is also a nice reminder that the compute bill can be more comforting than the proof.
bls121 month ago
> Seven of AES’s ten rounds That’s a toy target, not a production-security result.
ben_stderr1 month ago
Improved attack on HAWK sounds more interesting than the AES toy, but I’d want to see what breaks when the assumptions get less clean. Any real parameter sets affected?
raf131 month ago
From the excerpt, it sounds like no deployed HAWK parameter set is broken yet, just the candidate scheme in NIST review, and the AES result is only for 7 rounds, so I’d still want to know whether the attack survives when they move away from the clean symmetry setup or the simplified lattice assumptions.
zknews