[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: simultaneous lifetime type support required?
Michael C. Richardson wrote:
>
<snip...>
> Scott> Excellent - this is what I was looking for. Thanks!
>
> Wait, that was my *PROPOSED TEXT*!!! Thus the change bars.
Er, right. I got your earlier messages out of order, and was just
looking at the ARCH doc when I got this one, scratching my head.
I think a number of valid points have been made, and that this should
certainly be supported. Upon reflection, I'm a little shy about saying
that more MUST language should be added to the docs, but this really is
a matter of security: permitting either too much time or too much
ciphertext to a determined attacker is a bad thing (tm), so maybe it
should be made explicit.
References: